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) was submitted on November 12, 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.
Status of the Claims
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on September 25, 2024.
Claims 1-6 have been presented for examination.
Claims 1-6 are currently rejected.
Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2018/0154777) in view of Tsuchiya et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0241188).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2018/0154777) in view of Tsuchiya et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0241188), further in view of Hwang (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2025/0091576).
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a travel environment data obtainer” in claim 1
“a road detector” in claim 1
“a stop position detector” in claim 1
“a wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter” in claim 2
“an entry target vehicle speed setter” in claim 4
“a deceleration starting point setter” in claim 4
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
However, structure is provided as follows:
“a travel environment data obtainer” provided in ¶¶ 28-29 of the instant specification describing the element to be an image processor.
“a road detector” and “a stop position detector” provided in ¶ 9 of the instant specification describing these elements to be components of a processing circuit.
“a wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter” provided in ¶ 48 of the instant specification describing the element to be a component of a control unit, which is a processing circuit, see ¶ 26.
“an entry target vehicle speed setter” provided in ¶ 42 of the instant specification describing the element to be a component of a control unit, which is a processing circuit, see ¶ 26.
“a deceleration starting point setter” provided in ¶ 51 of the instant specification describing the element to be a component of a control unit, which is a processing circuit, see ¶ 26.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2018/0154777) in view of Tsuchiya et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0241188).
Regarding claim 1, Hall discloses a driver assistance apparatus for an electric vehicle, the driver assistance apparatus comprising:
a battery; (Hall ¶ 27 “a battery pack of vehicle 10”)
a motor generator configured to drive the electric vehicle with electric power supplied from the battery and charge the battery with electric power generated by regenerative braking upon decelerating the electric vehicle; (Hall ¶ 27 “electric motors 120 operate as generators to convert the kinetic energy of vehicle 10 into electric energy stored in an energy storage device, for example, a battery pack of vehicle 10m” such that “powertrain controller 100 may adjust the amount the regenerative braking generated by electric motors 120” of vehicle 10, wherein vehicle 10 is an “electric vehicle,” see ¶ 15)
a vehicle speed sensor configured to detect a vehicle speed of the electric vehicle; (Hall ¶ 48 “powertrain controller 100 may be programmed to determine ... the longitudinal speed (i.e., the speed of vehicle 10 along the direction parallel to the chassis”))
a travel environment data obtainer (Hall ¶ 16 “various sensors”) configured to acquire travel environment data on a travel environment ahead of the electric vehicle; and (Hall ¶ 16 “vehicle 10 may collect driving environment information, e.g., via various sensors” including “A radar, for example, may detect the existence of an obstacle or a vehicle in a certain direction, distance to a vehicle in front, rear, right-hand, or left-hand of vehicle 10,” see ¶ 19)
a processing circuit (Hall ¶ 33) configured to control the vehicle speed and a deceleration rate of the electric vehicle, based on the vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor and the travel environment data acquired by the travel environment data obtainer, by causing the motor generator to be driven and perform the regenerative braking, (Hall ¶ 33 discloses that processor 104 may receive signals acquired by driving environment detector 22 and may “further generate and transmit a control signal for actuating one or more components of RBS 26, such as electric motors 120,” wherein the regenerative braking decelerates the vehicle [i.e., control the vehicle speed and a deceleration rate], see ¶ 16. Also see ¶ 6 “The controller may also be configured to activate regenerative braking and friction braking to decelerate the vehicle”)
Hall does not expressly disclose:
wherein the processing circuit comprises a road detector configured to perform a detection of a wide street and a narrow street, based on the travel environment data acquired by the travel environment data obtainer, the wide street leading to the narrow street,
a stop position detector configured to perform a detection of a stop position, based on the travel environment data acquired by the travel environment data obtainer, the stop position being located down the narrow street detected by the road detector, and
a deceleration processor configured to decelerate the ... vehicle by the ... braking at a low deceleration rate in traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector.
However, Tsuchiya discloses:
wherein the processing circuit (Tsuchiya ¶ 111 and Fig. 7 “first control unit 120A”) comprises a road detector (Tsuchiya Fig. 7 recognition unit 130A) configured to perform a detection of a wide street and a narrow street, based on the travel environment data acquired by the travel environment data obtainer, the wide street leading to the narrow street, (Tsuchiya ¶ 48 discloses recognizing, by recognition unit 130 of control unit 120, “a lane (a traveling lane) on which the host vehicle M travels” including “a road width,” see ¶ 123, including “a state in which the width of the road R is narrow,” see Fig. 5 reproduced below)
PNG
media_image1.png
716
390
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a stop position detector (Tsuchiya ¶ 74 “stop factor recognition unit 132”) configured to perform a detection of a stop position, based on the travel environment data acquired by the travel environment data obtainer, the stop position being located down the narrow street detected by the road detector, and (Tsuchiya ¶ 74 “The stop factor recognition unit 132 recognizes, for example, a stop line S marked on the road surface of the road R as a stop position. The stop factor recognition unit 132 extracts, for example, a white line on the road surface on the basis of contrast of an image of the road R captured by the camera 10 or the like,” wherein the stop line S is down the narrow street depicted in Fig. 5.)
a deceleration processor (Tsuchiya ¶ 54 “second control unit 160”) configured to decelerate the ... vehicle by the ... braking at a low deceleration rate in traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector. (Tsuchiya ¶ 133 “automatically controlling acceleration or deceleration and steering of the vehicle on the basis of a recognized surrounding situation, determining, in a case that a stop position of the vehicle is recognized in a traveling direction of the vehicle, and a traffic participant proceeding at a speed lower than the speed of the vehicle in the traveling direction is recognized in front of the stop position,” wherein the “second control unit 160 automatically controls ... deceleration and steering of the host vehicle M on the basis of a surrounding situation,” see ¶ 53)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized the electric vehicle of Hall in place of the vehicle of Tsuchiya with reasonable expectation of success because using the electric vehicle enables regenerative braking. Thus, the substitution would result in decelerating the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking at a low deceleration rate in traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector.
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the external recognition sensor and deceleration of the electric vehicle of Hall with performing a detection of a wide street and a narrow street, the wide street leading to the narrow street, and decelerating the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking at a low deceleration rate in traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by a stop position detector, as disclosed by Tsuchiya, with reasonable expectation of success, because it is desirable to smooth traffic and to reduce influence on the traffic participant by following and traveling to the stop position without forcibly overtaking the traffic participant (Tsuchiya ¶ 60), rendering the limitation to be an obvious modification.
Regarding claim 2, Hall in combination with Tsuchiya discloses the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
the processing circuit (Tsuchiya ¶ 111 and Fig. 7 “first control unit 120A”) further comprises a wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter configured to set (Tsuchiya ¶¶ 50-51 discloses generating a “target trajectory in which the host vehicle M will travel in the future” which includes a “target speed” for a “low speed following traveling event [i.e., setting a deceleration rate]”), based on a distance from an entrance of the narrow street to a target stop point set relative to the stop position, a wide-street traveling deceleration rate to a lower value as the distance is shorter, and (Tsuchiya ¶ 53 discloses that “The second control unit 160 automatically controls the ... deceleration and steering of the host vehicle M on the basis of a surrounding situation recognized by the recognition unit 130” which includes “a stop position of a host vehicle,” see ¶ 48, such that “A trajectory point is a point to be reached by the host vehicle M for each predetermined traveling distance (for example, about several [m]) as a road distance” which includes “a target speed and target acceleration” for corresponding trajectory points, see ¶ 50)
the deceleration processor is configured to, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector, decelerate the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking in accordance with the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter upon traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street. (Tsuchiya ¶ 53 discloses that “The second control unit 160 automatically controls the ... deceleration and steering of the host vehicle M on the basis of a surrounding situation recognized by the recognition unit 130” which includes “a stop position of a host vehicle,” see ¶ 48. Also see Fig. 5.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the deceleration of Hall with the a wide-street traveling deceleration rate, and upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector, decelerate the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking in accordance with the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter upon traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, as disclosed by Tsuchiya, with reasonable expectation of success, because it is desirable to smooth traffic and to reduce influence on the traffic participant by following and traveling to the stop position without forcibly overtaking the traffic participant (Tsuchiya ¶ 60), rendering the limitation to be an obvious modification.
Regarding claim 3, Hall in combination with Tsuchiya does not expressly disclose the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising:
a state-of-charge sensor configured to detect a state of charge of the battery, (Hall ¶ 40 discloses “BMS 32 may constantly monitor the SoC of the battery pack”)
wherein the deceleration processor is configured to, when the state of charge detected by the state-of-charge sensor is less than or equal to a predetermined value, decelerate the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking ... (Hall ¶ 58 “If the SoC is below the prohibited level, powertrain controller 100 may activate RBS 26 [regenerative braking system]” to decelerate the vehicle, also see ¶ 6)
Hall does not expressly disclose:
[braking] in accordance with the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter.
However, Tsuchiya discloses:
[braking] in accordance with the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter. (Tsuchiya ¶ 53 discloses that “The second control unit 160 automatically controls the ... deceleration and steering of the host vehicle M on the basis of a surrounding situation recognized by the recognition unit 130” which includes “a stop position of a host vehicle,” see ¶ 48. Also see Fig. 5.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the regenerative braking of Hall with braking in accordance with the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter, as disclosed by Tsuchiya, with reasonable expectation of success, because it is desirable to smooth traffic and to reduce influence on the traffic participant by following and traveling to the stop position without forcibly overtaking the traffic participant (Tsuchiya ¶ 60), rendering the limitation to be an obvious modification.
Regarding claim 4, Hall in combination with Tsuchiya discloses the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the processing circuit further comprises:
an entry target vehicle speed setter (Tsuchiya ¶ 51 “action plan generation unit 140”) configured to set a target vehicle speed at which the vehicle is to enter the narrow street, (Tsuchiya ¶ 51 discloses an “action plan generation unit 140 generates a target trajectory in accordance with an activated event,” wherein the target trajectory includes a “target speed [i.e., setting a speed],” wherein the activated event includes a “low speed following traveling event” such as following a traffic participant [i.e., a narrow street], see ¶ 82, wherein the traffic participant may be “proceeding at a speed lower than the speed of the vehicle in the traveling direction,” see ¶ 7)
a speed difference processor (Tsuchiya ¶ 82 “following and overtaking control unit 142”) configured to calculate a speed difference between the vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor and the target vehicle speed set by the entry target vehicle speed setter, and (Tsuchiya ¶ 82 discloses “The following and overtaking control unit 142 performs control for causing the host vehicle M to ... follow the traffic participant, wherein the traffic participant may be “proceeding at a speed lower than the speed of the vehicle in the traveling direction,” see ¶ 7. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that following a traffic participant who is proceeding at a speed lower than the speed of the vehicle encompasses the vehicle calculating a speed difference.)
a deceleration starting point setter (Tsuchiya ¶ 54 “speed control unit 164”) configured to set a deceleration starting point, based on the wide-street traveling deceleration rate set by the wide-street traveling deceleration rate setter and the speed difference calculated by the speed difference processor, and (Tsuchiya Fig. 8 depicts setting the vehicle to follow a traffic participant in accordance with attributes of the traffic participant (S210), which includes “automatically controlling ... deceleration and steering of the vehicle on the basis of a recognized surrounding situation,” see ¶ 133, wherein the travelling driving force and braking is controlled by speed control unit 164, see ¶ 54)
the deceleration processor (Tsuchiya ¶ 133 “second control unit 160”) is configured to, when the ... vehicle has reached the deceleration starting point, start to decelerate the electric vehicle. (Tsuchiya ¶ 53 “second control unit 160 automatically controls the acceleration or deceleration and steering of the host vehicle M on the basis of a surrounding situation recognized by the recognition unit 130”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have utilized the electric vehicle of Hall in place of the vehicle of Tsuchiya with reasonable expectation of success because using the electric vehicle enables regenerative braking. Thus, the substitution would result in decelerating the electric vehicle by the regenerative braking at a low deceleration rate in traveling on the wide street prior to entering the narrow street, upon the detection of the narrow street by the road detector and the detection of the stop position by the stop position detector.
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the deceleration of Hall with setting a target vehicle speed at which the vehicle is to enter the narrow street, as disclosed by Tsuchiya, with reasonable expectation of success, reduce an effect on a traffic participant more reliably (Tsuchiya ¶ 19), rendering the limitation to be an obvious modification.
Regarding claim 6, Hall in combination with Tsuchiya discloses the parallel limitations contained in parent claim 1 for the reasons discussed above.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2018/0154777) in view of Tsuchiya et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0241188), further in view of Hwang (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2025/0091576).
Regarding claim 5, Hall in combination with Tsuchiya does not expressly disclose the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 4, wherein:
when the vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor is greater than or equal to a set vehicle speed, the deceleration processor is configured to start to decelerate the electric vehicle.
However, Hwang discloses:
when the vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor is greater than or equal to a set vehicle speed, the deceleration processor is configured to start to decelerate the electric vehicle. (Hwang ¶ 61 discloses that a “determination unit 151 may determine the target control vehicle speed in consideration of a preset vehicle speed upper limit value and vehicle speed lower limit value additionally with respect to the preset target vehicle speed,” such that “a section in which the electrified vehicle 100 performs the deceleration travel may be a section in which the electrified vehicle 100 decelerates from the target upper limit control vehicle speed,” see ¶ 62)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the vehicle speed sensing of Hall with detecting that the vehicle speed is greater than or equal to a set vehicle speed, as disclosed by Hwang, with reasonable expectation of success, to define a section in which acceleration and deceleration travel is to be performed to control the vehicle to travel with optimal fuel efficiency, see ¶¶ 2 and 15.
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combination of Hall and Tsuchiya to incorporate that when the vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor is greater than or equal to a set vehicle speed, the deceleration processor is configured to start to decelerate the electric vehicle, as disclosed by Hwang, with reasonable expectation of success, to provide optimal fuel efficiency when the electric vehicle is traveling (Hwang ¶ 9), rendering the limitation to be an obvious modification.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yang Li et al. “An AV-MV negotiation method based on synchronous prompt information on a multi-vehicle bottleneck road” (2023) discloses a simulation for an autonomous vehicle approaching a bottleneck area of a road while yielding to oncoming traffic.
Imanishi et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2016/0375775) discloses a drive control device of a moving body capable of increasing a regeneration amount without hindering a driver's brake operation and causing too much deceleration.
Izumi et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2025/0360925) discloses a travel control that gives priority to traveling of another vehicle in a case where the connection road is the narrow road.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE T SU whose telephone number is (571)272-5326. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:30AM - 5:00PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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.
/STEPHANIE T SU/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662