DETAILED ACTION
This action is response to application number 18/883,879, dated on 03/18/2025.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 2-28 pending.
Claim 1 cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claims 20, 23 and 26 limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim 20, limitations means for obtaining a decision-point value, means for sending a long buffer status report and means for sending a short buffer status report, are equivalent to figure 6 els. 646, 647, and as described in ¶100-¶101 of specification.
Claim 23, limitation means for obtaining the additional respective value is equivalent to figure 6, els. 646, 647, and as described in ¶100-¶101 of specification.
Claim 26, limitation means for obtaining the additional respective value assigned to the cost function, is equivalent to figure 6, els. 646, 647, and as described in ¶100-¶101 and ¶105 of specification.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 2-28 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims 2, 11, 20, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 1 discloses a wireless communication device (claim 1), comprising:
one or more memories (claim 1); and
one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors being configured to (claim 1):
obtain a decision-point value based on uplink data held in a buffer (claim 1),
send, for a logical channel group having the uplink data pending an uplink transmission, a long buffer status report in response to the decision-point value exceeding a threshold value (claim 1), and
send, for the logical channel group, a short buffer status report in response to the decision-point value being equal to or less than the threshold value (claim 1).
Claims 3, 12, 21, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 2 discloses wherein the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to at least one of (claim 2):
a cost function (claim 2),
a type of the wireless communication device, wherein the type is a non-customer premise equipment type or a customer premise equipment type of wireless communication device (claim 2), or
a latency of communications of the wireless communication device (claim 2).
Claims 4, 13, 22, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 3 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on a value assigned to a peak power envelope of the wireless communication device that changes as the peak power envelope changes (claim 3).
Claims 5, 14, 23, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 4 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a data transmission rate (claim 4); and
the one or more processors being further configured to (claim 4):
obtain the additional respective value from historical data stored in the one or more memories of the wireless communication device (claim 4).
Claims 6, 15, 24, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 5 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a number of component carriers allocated to the wireless communication device (claim 5); and
the additional respective value increases as the number of component carriers increases (claim 5).
Claims 7, 16, 25, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 6 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a cost function (claim 6).
Claims 8, 17, 26, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 7 discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to obtain the additional respective value assigned to the cost function by comparing (claim 7):
a first amount of power required to transmit the uplink data utilizing a single component carrier having a first channel capacity (claim 7), to
a second amount of power required to transmit the uplink data in a plurality of component carriers having a collective channel capacity (claim 7),
wherein the additional respective value assigned to the cost function increases as the first amount of power decreases relative to the second amount of power (claim 7).
Claims 9, 18, 27, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 8 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to an amount of data associated with the logical channel group (claim 8); and
the additional respective value decreases as the amount of data decreases (claim 8).
Claims 10, 19, 28, U.S. Patent No. 12,120,549 claim 9 discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value associated with a type of the wireless communication device (claim 9); and
the additional respective value is greater for non-customer premise equipment than for customer premise equipment (claim 9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claims 2, 9, 11, 18, 20 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wu el. al. (US 2009/0113086 A1).
Claims 2, 11, 20, Wu discloses a wireless communication device (UE; Fig. 1, el. 11), comprising:
one or more memories (memory of the UE; Fig. 1, el. 11); and
one or more processors (processor of the UE; Fig. 1, el. 11) coupled to the one or more memories (processor of the UE coupled to the transceiver and the memory of the UE; Fig. 1, el. 11), the one or more processors being configured to:
obtain a decision-point value based on uplink data held in a buffer (obtaining a decision-point value based on uplink data to send a short BSR, or to send a long BSR; abstract; Each user equipment has multiple logical channels divided into a plurality of logical channel groups (LCGs), each logical channel group (LCG) corresponds to a buffer and a buffer status of the buffer, and each logical channel has a priority. The method includes the steps: (A) having an arrival data to buffers of the user equipment and the priority of a logical channel for the arrival data higher than those of other logical channels for existing data in the buffers; (B) comparing the buffer status of other logical channel groups without containing the arrival data and a previous buffer status report (BSR) to thereby produce a comparison difference; and (C) triggering a short BSR associated with the buffer of an LCG corresponding to the arrival data when the comparison difference is smaller than a threshold, and otherwise triggering a BSR associated with the buffers of multiple LCGs that contain data in the buffers; ¶25; ¶26),
send, for a logical channel group having the uplink data pending an uplink transmission (a logical channel group having an amount of data pending for an uplink transmission; A BSR shall be triggered if any of the following events occur: (1) Uplink data arrives in the buffers of the UE and the data belongs to a logical channel group with higher priority than those for which data already existed in the buffers of the UE; ¶9-¶10), a long buffer status report in response to the decision-point value exceeding a threshold value (sending a long BSR in response to the comparison decision value in compare to a threshold value; The short BSR provides the buffer status corresponding to a single LCG, with a format shown in FIG. 4 in which a 2-bit LCG identification (ID) field and a 6-bit buffer size field are included. The LCG ID field indicates the corresponding LCG to the reported buffer status, and the buffer size field indicates all pending data amount of all LCs of the corresponding LCG. The long BSR provides the buffer status of all LCGs, with a format shown in FIG. 5 in which there are three bytes having four 6-bit buffer size fields to indicate LCG ID Number 1-4 respectively. As cited, the UE sends a short BSR with one byte for providing a buffer status report of one LCG or a long BSR with three bytes for providing a buffer status report of four LCGs; ¶15-¶16; Each user equipment has multiple logical channels divided into a plurality of logical channel groups (LCGs), each logical channel group (LCG) corresponds to a buffer and a buffer status of the buffer, and each logical channel has a priority. The method includes the steps: (A) having an arrival data to buffers of the user equipment and the priority of a logical channel for the arrival data higher than those of other logical channels for existing data in the buffers; (B) comparing the buffer status of other logical channel groups without containing the arrival data and a previous buffer status report (BSR) to thereby produce a comparison difference; and (C) triggering a short BSR associated with the buffer of an LCG corresponding to the arrival data when the comparison difference is smaller than a threshold, and otherwise triggering a BSR associated with the buffers of multiple LCGs that contain data in the buffers; ¶25; ¶26; Alternatively, the user equipment 61 may compare the buffer status 622-624 of other logical channel groups 602-604 without containing the arrival data and a predefined value (step S902) to produce the comparison difference. Then, the user equipment 61 triggers a short BSR (step S903) associated with the buffer 611 of the LCG 601 corresponding to the arrival data when the comparison difference is smaller than a threshold, thereby avoiding the undesired BSR from occupying the network resources. After the short BSR is triggered, the following steps are identical to the steps of FIG. 7(A) starting with the resource allocation, and thus no more detail is described. When the comparison difference is not smaller than the threshold, the user equipment 61 triggers a BSR (step S904). After the BSR is triggered, the following steps are identical to the steps of FIG. 8(A) starting with the resource allocation, and thus no more detail is described; ¶48), and
send, for the logical channel group, a short buffer status report in response to the decision-point value being equal to or less than the threshold value (sending a short BSR in response to the comparison decision value in compare to a threshold value; The short BSR provides the buffer status corresponding to a single LCG, with a format shown in FIG. 4 in which a 2-bit LCG identification (ID) field and a 6-bit buffer size field are included. The LCG ID field indicates the corresponding LCG to the reported buffer status, and the buffer size field indicates all pending data amount of all LCs of the corresponding LCG. The long BSR provides the buffer status of all LCGs, with a format shown in FIG. 5 in which there are three bytes having four 6-bit buffer size fields to indicate LCG ID Number 1-4 respectively. As cited, the UE sends a short BSR with one byte for providing a buffer status report of one LCG or a long BSR with three bytes for providing a buffer status report of four LCGs; ¶15-¶16; Each user equipment has multiple logical channels divided into a plurality of logical channel groups (LCGs), each logical channel group (LCG) corresponds to a buffer and a buffer status of the buffer, and each logical channel has a priority. The method includes the steps: (A) having an arrival data to buffers of the user equipment and the priority of a logical channel for the arrival data higher than those of other logical channels for existing data in the buffers; (B) comparing the buffer status of other logical channel groups without containing the arrival data and a previous buffer status report (BSR) to thereby produce a comparison difference; and (C) triggering a short BSR associated with the buffer of an LCG corresponding to the arrival data when the comparison difference is smaller than a threshold, and otherwise triggering a BSR associated with the buffers of multiple LCGs that contain data in the buffers; ¶25; ¶26; Alternatively, the user equipment 61 may compare the buffer status 622-624 of other logical channel groups 602-604 without containing the arrival data and a predefined value (step S902) to produce the comparison difference. Then, the user equipment 61 triggers a short BSR (step S903) associated with the buffer 611 of the LCG 601 corresponding to the arrival data when the comparison difference is smaller than a threshold, thereby avoiding the undesired BSR from occupying the network resources. After the short BSR is triggered, the following steps are identical to the steps of FIG. 7(A) starting with the resource allocation, and thus no more detail is described. When the comparison difference is not smaller than the threshold, the user equipment 61 triggers a BSR (step S904). After the BSR is triggered, the following steps are identical to the steps of FIG. 8(A) starting with the resource allocation, and thus no more detail is described; ¶48).
Claims 9, 18, 27, Wu discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to an amount of data associated with the logical channel group; and the additional respective value decreases as the amount of data decreases (the number of LCGs as the decision-point value having an amount of data associated with the logical channel group, and the number of LCGs decreases as the number of LCG with the associated data decreases; The short BSR provides the buffer status corresponding to a single LCG, with a format shown in FIG. 4 in which a 2-bit LCG identification (ID) field and a 6-bit buffer size field are included. The LCG ID field indicates the corresponding LCG to the reported buffer status, and the buffer size field indicates all pending data amount of all LCs of the corresponding LCG. The long BSR provides the buffer status of all LCGs, with a format shown in FIG. 5 in which there are three bytes having four 6-bit buffer size fields to indicate LCG ID Number 1-4 respectively. As cited, the UE sends a short BSR with one byte for providing a buffer status report of one LCG or a long BSR with three bytes for providing a buffer status report of four LCGs; ¶15-¶16; (D) using the user equipment to transmit the short BSR corresponding to the buffer of an LCG when only the buffer of the LCG has remaining data; and (E) using the user equipment to transmit a long BSR when the buffers of multiple LCGs have remaining data; ¶24).
Claims 3, 5, 7, 12, 14, 16, 21, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu el. al. (US 2009/0113086 A1) in view of Huang el. al. (US 2013/0107722 A1).
Claims 3, 12, 21, Huang in the same field of endeavor, method and system for realizing buffer status reporting (title), discloses wherein the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to at least one of:
a cost function (selecting BSR format to send based on the traffic flow, data transmission rate or service attribute; receive a determination result sent from an evolved Node B after the evolved Node B determines which one of the original buffer status level format and the newly-added buffer status level format the user equipment should us according to traffic flow, data transmission rate or service attribute of the user equipment; ¶54; ¶86; For example, when the UE judges that the traffic flow increases and exceeds a particular threshold, the UE reports a measurement report to request for using the BSR table 1, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1 after receiving the request; when the UE judges that the traffic flow decreases and is below a particular threshold, the UE reports a measurement report to request for using the BSR table 0, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 0 after receiving the request; ¶95; For example, when the UE uses the BSR table 0, and the level values in the BSR tables, which are used by the UE and reported by the UE, received by the eNB are all between 60-63 continuously for several times, the eNB judges that the current buffer occupation ratio of the UE is very high and may further increase, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1 ; ¶100; ¶112),
a type of the wireless communication device, wherein the type is a non-customer premise equipment type or a customer premise equipment type of wireless communication device, or
a latency of communications of the wireless communication device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to determine the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a cost function, as taught by Huang to modify Wu’s method and system in order to determine the type of the BSR to be sent to other nodes of the wireless communication network (title; ¶1).
Claims 5, 14, 23, Huang in the same field of endeavor, method and system for realizing buffer status reporting (title), discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a data transmission rate; and the one or more processors being further configured to: obtain the additional respective value from historical data stored in the one or more memories of the wireless communication device (selecting BSR format to send based on the data transmission rate; receive a determination result sent from an evolved Node B after the evolved Node B determines which one of the original buffer status level format and the newly-added buffer status level format the user equipment should us according to traffic flow, data transmission rate or service attribute of the user equipment; ¶54; ¶86; The eNB may also use the data transmission rate of the user as the basis for selecting the BSR table. For example, when the eNB judges that the data transmission rate of the UE is greater than the threshold preset by the system, the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1, otherwise, use the BSR table 0; ¶89; For example, when the UE uses the BSR table 0, and the level values in the BSR tables, which are used by the UE and reported by the UE, received by the eNB are all between 60-63 continuously for several times, the eNB judges that the current buffer occupation ratio of the UE is very high and may further increase, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1; ¶100; ¶112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to determine BSR type based on a data transmission rate historically obtained by the wireless communication device and obtain the respective value from historical data stored in the memory of the wireless communication device, as taught by Huang to modify Wu’s method and system in order to determine the type of the BSR to be sent to other nodes of the wireless communication network (title; ¶1).
Claims 7, 16, 25, Huang in the same field of endeavor, method and system for realizing buffer status reporting (title), discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a cost function (selecting BSR format to send based on the traffic flow, data transmission rate or service attribute; receive a determination result sent from an evolved Node B after the evolved Node B determines which one of the original buffer status level format and the newly-added buffer status level format the user equipment should us according to traffic flow, data transmission rate or service attribute of the user equipment; ¶54; ¶86; For example, when the UE judges that the traffic flow increases and exceeds a particular threshold, the UE reports a measurement report to request for using the BSR table 1, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1 after receiving the request; when the UE judges that the traffic flow decreases and is below a particular threshold, the UE reports a measurement report to request for using the BSR table 0, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 0 after receiving the request; ¶95; For example, when the UE uses the BSR table 0, and the level values in the BSR tables, which are used by the UE and reported by the UE, received by the eNB are all between 60-63 continuously for several times, the eNB judges that the current buffer occupation ratio of the UE is very high and may further increase, and the eNB instructs the UE to use the BSR table 1 ; ¶100; ¶112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to determine the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a cost function, as taught by Huang to modify Wu’s method and system in order to determine the type of the BSR to be sent to other nodes of the wireless communication network (title; ¶1).
Claims 6, 16 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu el. al. (US 2009/0113086 A1) in view of Wu el. al. (US 2013/0094455 A1).
Claims 6, 15, 24, Wu (455) in the same field of endeavor, dynamic buffer status report selection for carrier aggregation discloses wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value assigned to a number of component carriers allocated to the wireless communication device; and the additional respective value increases as the number of component carriers increases (In accordance with the foregoing method, where the user equipment stores a plurality of buffer status report tables, individual ones of which correspond to an individual one of a number of component carriers allocated to the user equipment for transmitting data on the uplink; ¶107; In accordance with the foregoing method, where the user equipment stores a plurality of buffer status report tables, where each of the plurality of buffer status report tables has a different maximum value and granularity; ¶108; In accordance with the foregoing method, where the user equipment stores a plurality of buffer status report tables, and where at least one of the plurality of buffer status report tables is composed in consideration of a number of uplink component carriers in use and in consideration of uplink multiple input/multiple output operation; ¶109; claim 9; claim 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to the decision-point value is based on an additional respective value assigned to a number of component carriers allocated to the wireless communication device; and the respective value increases as the number of component carriers increases, as taught by Wu (455) to modify Wu’s method and system in order to determine the type of the BSR to be sent to other nodes of the wireless communication network (title; ¶1; ¶111).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 10, 13, 17, 19, 22, 26 and 28 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 4, 13, 22, (New) The wireless communication device of claim 2, wherein: the decision-point value is further based on a value assigned to a peak power envelope of the wireless communication device that changes as the peak power envelope changes.
Claims 8, 17, 26, (New) The wireless communication device of claim 7, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to obtain the additional respective value assigned to the cost function by comparing:
a first amount of power required to transmit the uplink data utilizing a single component carrier having a first channel capacity, to
a second amount of power required to transmit the uplink data in a plurality of component carriers having a collective channel capacity,
wherein the additional respective value assigned to the cost function increases as the first amount of power decreases relative to the second amount of power.
Claims 10, 19, 28, (New) The wireless communication device of claim 2, wherein: the decision-point value is further based on an additional respective value associated with a type of the wireless communication device; and
the additional respective value is greater for non-customer premise equipment than for customer premise equipment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KOUROUSH MOHEBBI whose telephone number is (571)270-7908. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached on 571-272-8586. 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.
/KOUROUSH MOHEBBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights