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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/10/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following claim interpretations, given under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2111), are applied throughout this Office Action.
The term “transmission opportunity (TXOP)” is given its ordinary and customary meaning in the IEEE 802.11 art, namely an interval of time during which a station has the right to access the wireless medium and to initiate one or more transmissions. Read in light of the specification, the TXOP is an interval that a TXOP-holding station obtains by gaining channel access and then shares among a group of stations (specification, para. [0156] “In order to share the TXOP among TXOP sharing group STAs, the TXOP holder can use portion of the TXOP and release the rest to others STAs in the group”; specification, para. [0147] “multiple STAs can contend to share a TXOP among them”).
Read in light of the specification, the recitation “signaling comprising information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP)” is interpreted as any signaling by which a station conveys information about such a shared TXOP to another station, the specification describing that the first non-AP station receives information corresponding to a TXOP from a second non-AP station (specification, para. [0166] “a first non-AP 106A can receive information corresponding to a TXOP from a second non-AP”). The recitation “at least a portion of the TXOP” is interpreted, in light of the specification, as any subset of the time or resources of the TXOP, the specification describing that the TXOP holder uses a portion of the TXOP and releases the remainder to other stations of the group and that a station may finish transmitting early during its portion of the TXOP (specification, para. [0156] “the TXOP holder can use portion of the TXOP and release the rest to others STAs in the group”; specification, para. [0201] “a STA finishes transmitting early during its portion of the TXOP”). The recitation “scheduling information associated with the group” is interpreted, in light of the specification, consistent with the specification's description of a predefined or assigned schedule among the stations of the group (specification, para. [0197] “can have a predefined or assigned schedule to alternate the TXOP beneficiary”).
Applying this interpretation to the prior art of record, Hedayat's “Transmission Opportunity (TXOP)” corresponds to the claimed “transmission opportunity (TXOP)” (Hedayat, para. [0083] “The medium sharing generally happens during a Transmission Opportunity (TXOP)”; Hedayat, para. [0028] “authorized to use a transmission opportunity”); Hedayat's host station corresponds to the claimed “second non-AP station”; Hedayat's guest station corresponds to the claimed “first non-AP station”; the host station together with the one or more guest stations corresponds to the claimed “group of at least two non-AP stations”; Hedayat's shared-transmission trigger frame corresponds to the claimed “signaling comprising information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP)” (Hedayat, para. [0197] “A host STA indicates the attributes of the shared TXOP in an initiating (e.g., trigger) frame”); and Hedayat's shared or leftover resource units correspond to the claimed “at least a portion of the TXOP.” These correspondences are relied upon in the rejections set forth below.
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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hedayat (US 2023/0042554 A1) in view of Ajami (US 2024/0381418 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hedayat discloses A method, comprising: at a first non-access point (non-AP) station of a group of at least two non-AP stations: because Hedayat teaches an IEEE 802.11 medium-sharing method carried out among a group of non-AP stations comprising a host station and one or more guest stations (Hedayat, para. [0025] “A shared transmission type of trigger frame, generated and transmitted by the host station communicates information identifying the attributes”; Hedayat, para. [0088] “the remaining RUs (out of all possible RUs) are the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”). The method is performed at a guest station (i.e., the claimed “first non-AP station”), and Hedayat's host station together with the one or more guest stations form the claimed group of at least two non-AP stations, each of the host station and the guest station being a non-access-point station. Hedayat further confirms that this sharing among the stations occurs during a transmission opportunity, corresponding to the claimed TXOP context of the method (Hedayat, para. [0083] “The medium sharing generally happens during a Transmission Opportunity (TXOP)”).
Furthermore, Hedayat discloses receiving, from a second non-AP station of the group of at least two non-AP stations, signaling comprising information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP), because Hedayat teaches that the guest station receives, from the host station (i.e., the claimed second non-AP station), a shared-transmission trigger frame in which the host station indicates the attributes of the shared Transmission Opportunity (i.e., the “TXOP” as claimed) (Hedayat, para. [0104] “The guest STA, which has received the Trigger Frame transmitted by the Host STA”; Hedayat, para. [0197] “A host STA indicates the attributes of the shared TXOP in an initiating (e.g., trigger) frame”; Hedayat, para. [0088] “the remaining RUs (out of all possible RUs) are the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”). The shared-transmission trigger frame received by the guest station is the claimed signaling comprising information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP), because it conveys to the guest station the attributes of the TXOP that the host station shares, and the shared transmission occurs during a Transmission Opportunity that corresponds to the claimed TXOP (Hedayat, para. [0083] “The medium sharing generally happens during a Transmission Opportunity (TXOP)”).
Furthermore, Hedayat discloses wherein the first data is transmitted to the one or more devices in at least a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches that the guest station transmits its data as a trigger-based (TB) frame (i.e., the claimed first data) on the leftover resource units (i.e., the claimed at least a portion of the TXOP) during the host station's Transmission Opportunity (Hedayat, para. [0090] “The host STA transmits the TB frame and does not transmit in the leftover RU (identified in the trigger frame)”; Hedayat, para. [0104] “Various operation performed by a guest STA aiming to transmit on the leftover RUs”; Hedayat, para. [0208] “receives signals including data from STA 2 2906, on guest resource units of TB frame”). The leftover or guest resource units on which the guest station transmits are a subset of the resource units of the Transmission Opportunity and are therefore at least a portion of the TXOP as claimed.
With respect to claim 1, although Hedayat teaches transmitting first data on the shared resource units during the obtained TXOP (Hedayat, para. [0090], para. [0104]), Hedayat does not explicitly disclose the scheduling information associated with the group of at least two non-AP stations recited in the following limitation.
However, Hedayat in view of Ajami discloses transmitting, in accordance with the information corresponding to the TXOP and scheduling information associated with the group of at least two non-AP stations, first data to one or more devices because Ajami teaches scheduling information (i.e., the claimed scheduling information associated with the group) that indicates the resources associated with each portion of the shared transmit opportunity, Ajami's shared TXOP corresponding to the claimed TXOP (Ajami, para. [0052] “the scheduling information may include an indication of a bandwidth portion of the wireless channel such as an indication of one or more subchannels or resource units (RUs) associated with each portion of the TXOP”; Ajami, para. [0004] “allow, during a transmit opportunity (TXOP) shared with a second wireless node, a third wireless node to transmit to the second wireless node”). The guest station of Hedayat thus transmits its first data in accordance with both the information corresponding to the TXOP conveyed by the shared-transmission trigger frame and the per-portion scheduling information taught by Ajami.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include, in the shared-transmission trigger frame of Hedayat, the per-portion scheduling information of Ajami so as to coordinate the transmissions of the group of guest stations within the shared TXOP, a combination of prior-art elements according to known methods yielding the predictable result of collision-free multi-station transmission within a single obtained TXOP (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 2, Hedayat discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the signaling comprising information corresponding to the TXOP indicates for only the first non-AP station to transmit the first data using at least a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches that the trigger frame identifies a set of shared resource units (i.e., “information corresponding to the TXOP indicates for only the first non-AP station”) to be used by a particular guest station (Hedayat, para. [0099] “identifies a set of RUs to be used by the first guest STA in the TB frame”).
Regarding claim 3, although Hedayat teaches transmission by the guest station within the shared TXOP (Hedayat, para. [0090]), Hedayat does not explicitly disclose the early-termination limitation: The method of claim 2, wherein, when the first non-AP station completes transmission of the first data prior to an end of the TXOP, the method further comprises: transmitting, to a group address associated with the group of at least two non-AP stations, a control frame to terminate the TXOP, the control frame comprising one or more parameters.
However, Hedayat in view of Ajami discloses that a shared station sends a CF-End frame, whose receiver address may be a group address, to reset the network allocation vector (Ajami, para. [0119] “the TXOP shared STA may send a CF-End to reset the NAV set by the CTS-to-TXOP-shared STA frame”; Ajami, para. [0112] “the RA address may be set to a group address (e.g., an address known to a group of a STAs/APs)”). Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to terminate the shared TXOP of Hedayat with the group-addressed CF-End frame of Ajami so as to release the medium promptly when a station finishes early, a use of a known technique to improve a similar method in the same way (MPEP 2143(I)(C)). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Hedayat and Ajami is the same as set forth for claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Hedayat discloses The method of claim 2, wherein the method further comprises: transmitting, to the at least two non-AP stations, one or more multiple user block acknowledgement requests (MU-BAR); and receiving, from the at least two non-AP stations, one or more block acknowledgements (BAs), because Hedayat teaches a multiple-user block acknowledgement request as a trigger type transmitted by the station, and teaches the exchange of acknowledgements for the shared-resource-unit transmissions (Hedayat, para. [0018] “A Trigger Type subfield value of 2 indicates MU BAR”; Hedayat, para. [0349] “one or more signal acknowledgments in response to signals received on the shared resource units of the transmission opportunity”). Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit the MU-BAR trigger to the group of non-AP stations and to receive the resulting block acknowledgements therefrom so as to confirm delivery of the shared-TXOP transmissions, a combination of prior-art elements according to known methods yielding predictable results (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Hedayat discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the signaling comprising information corresponding to the TXOP indicates for the first non-AP station and one or more additional non-AP stations of the group of at least two non-AP stations to respectively transmit data to the one or more devices using at least a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches that the shared resource units of the trigger frame are made available to plural guest stations that respectively transmit (Hedayat, para. [0088] “the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”; Hedayat, para. [0025] “to one or more guest stations”).
Regarding claim 6, although Hedayat teaches plural guest stations transmitting within the shared TXOP (Hedayat, para. [0088]), Hedayat does not explicitly disclose the early-termination limitation. es The method of claim 5, wherein, when one of the at least two non-AP stations completes a respective transmission of data prior to an end of the TXOP, the method further comprises: receiving, based on a group address associated with the group of at least two non-AP stations, a control frame to terminate the TXOP, the control comprising one or more parameters
However, Hedayat in view of Ajami disclose that the group-addressed CF-End frame that resets the network allocation vector (Ajami, para. [0119] “the TXOP shared STA may send a CF-End to reset the NAV set by the CTS-to-TXOP-shared STA frame”; Ajami, para. [0112] “the RA address may be set to a group address”).
Accordingly, the combination is obvious for the reasons given for claim 3 (MPEP 2143(I)(C)) and therefore, the rationale to combine Hedayat and Ajami also is the same as set forth for claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, Hedayat discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the group of at least two non-AP stations is associated with a group address or group identifier (ID), because Hedayat teaches setting an association identifier field to a fixed value that indicates availability to the group of guest stations (Hedayat, para. [0099] “to a fixed value, e.g. 000000000000, to indicate availability for guest STAs”).
Regarding claim 8, Hedayat discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the first data is transmitted to one or more devices including at least one of: one or more APs; one or more mobile APs; one or more non-APs; or one or more non-AP stations (STAs), because Hedayat teaches guest-station transmissions on the shared resource units to the stations of the network (Hedayat, para. [0088] “the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”), and the selection among these known device types is an obvious design choice yielding predictable results.
Regarding claim 9, Hedayat discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the signaling comprising information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP) comprises a control frame including an address of the group of at least two non-AP stations, because Hedayat teaches the trigger frame carrying the association identifier field set to indicate the group of guest stations (Hedayat, para. [0099] “to a fixed value, e.g. 000000000000, to indicate availability for guest STAs”).
Regarding claim 10, Hedayat discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the method is performed after one or more contention periods have elapsed, because Hedayat teaches that a station obtains the transmission opportunity by a listen-before-talk contention operation (Hedayat, para. [0028] “stations use a listen before talk (LBT) operation to determine if the station performing the LBT operation is authorized to use a transmission opportunity and thus obtain the right to act as a host station”).
Regarding claim 11, Hedayat discloses A processor, comprising: memory storing instructions that, when executed, cause a first non-access point (non-AP) station to: establish, via an access channel, a wireless link with an access point (AP), because Hedayat teaches a station having a processor and memory that obtains an access channel by a listen-before-talk operation (Hedayat, para. [0028] “stations use a listen before talk (LBT) operation to determine if the station performing the LBT operation is authorized to use a transmission opportunity”).
Although Hedayat teaches a station that obtains and shares a transmission opportunity (i.e., the claimed TXOP) (Hedayat, para. [0028], para. [0088]), Hedayat does not explicitly disclose the following request-to-AP limitation. transmit, to the AP, a request corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP) and comprising an address of the first non-AP station
However, Hedayat in view of Ajami discloses that a non-AP node that outputs, for transmission, a request associated with a shared transmit opportunity (i.e., the request corresponding to the claimed TXOP), the request being carried in a frame that inherently identifies its transmitting non-AP node by address (Ajami, para. [0006] “a first frame that includes a request for a network allocation vector (NAV) setting associated with a shared transmission opportunity (TXOP)”). Ajami's shared transmission opportunity is the claimed TXOP to which the request corresponds.
Furthermore, Hedayat in view of Ajami discloses receive a response from the AP because Ajami teaches that the requesting node obtains a triggering frame in response (Ajami, para. [0006] “second frame triggering the shared TXOP”).
Furthermore, Hedayat discloses transmit, in accordance with scheduling information associated with the first non-AP station, first data in at least a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches the station transmitting its data (i.e., the claimed first data) on the resource units identified for it (i.e., in accordance with the claimed scheduling information associated with the first non-AP station) within the obtained Transmission Opportunity (i.e., the claimed TXOP) (Hedayat, para. [0090] “The host STA transmits the TB frame and does not transmit in the leftover RU (identified in the trigger frame)”; Hedayat, para. [0208] “receives signals including data from STA 2 2906, on guest resource units of TB frame”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hedayat's obtained-TXOP transmission with Ajami's request-and-response TXOP-sharing signaling with the AP so as to enable the station to obtain and use a scheduled portion of a TXOP for its own transmission, a combination of prior-art elements according to known methods yielding the predictable result of coordinated station transmission within a shared TXOP (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Accordingly, the rationale to combine Hedayat and Ajami is the same as set forth for claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 11, although Hedayat teaches sharing the obtained TXOP among guest stations (Hedayat, para. [0088]), Hedayat does not explicitly disclose the early-completion broadcast limitation: The processor of claim 11, wherein, when the first non-AP station completes transmission of the first data prior to an end of the TXOP, the instructions are further executable to cause the first non-AP station to: broadcast, to a group address of a group of at least two non-AP stations, one or more control frames to invite the at least two non-AP stations to transmit
However, Hedayat in view of Ajami discloses that the group-addressed frame that resets the network allocation vector on early completion (Ajami, para. [0112] “the RA address may be set to a group address”; Ajami, para. [0119] “the TXOP shared STA may send a CF-End to reset the NAV”). Accordingly, the combination is obvious for the reasons given for claim 11 (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 13, Hedayat discloses: The processor of claim 11, wherein the request includes an indication for only one of the at least two non-AP stations to transmit data using at least a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches the trigger identifying the shared units for a particular guest station (Hedayat, para. [0099] “identifies a set of RUs to be used by the first guest STA”).
Regarding claim 14, Hedayat discloses The processor of claim 11, wherein the instructions are further executable to cause the first non-AP station to: receive, from one or more of the at least two non-AP stations, one or more invitation to transmit (ITS) messages, because Hedayat teaches the shared-transmission trigger frame by which the host station solicits the guest stations to transmit on the shared resource units, which under the broadest reasonable interpretation is an invitation-to-transmit message (Hedayat, para. [0025] “A shared transmission type of trigger frame, generated and transmitted by the host station communicates information identifying the attributes”).
Regarding claim 15, Hedayat discloses: The processor of claim 14, wherein the one or more ITS messages indicate to the first non-AP station that a non-AP station has no data to transmit or that a non-AP station has completed transmission of data prior to an end of a portion of the TXOP, because Hedayat teaches an acknowledgement that indicates whether data was received on the resource units, which conveys the completion state, and conveying such a buffer or completion state is at most an obvious indication yielding predictable results (Hedayat, para. [0161] “the first acknowledgment includes an indication whether data”) (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Ajami (US 2024/0381418 A1) in view of Hedayat (US 2023/0042554 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Ajami discloses An access point (AP), comprising: a radio; and a processor operably coupled to the radio and configured to cause the AP to: establish, via an access channel, a wireless link with a first non-access point (non-AP) station in a group of at least two non-APs, because Ajami teaches an access point, having a processor and radio, that establishes communication with a non-AP node (i.e., the claimed first non-AP station) for a shared transmit opportunity (i.e., the claimed TXOP) (Ajami, para. [0006] “a first frame that includes a request for a network allocation vector (NAV) setting associated with a shared transmission opportunity (TXOP)”; Ajami, para. [0004] “allow, during a transmit opportunity (TXOP) shared with a second wireless node, a third wireless node to transmit to the second wireless node”). The group of at least two non-APs is further taught by Hedayat's plurality of guest stations to which the shared resource units are made available (Hedayat, para. [0088] “the remaining RUs (out of all possible RUs) are the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”).
Furthermore, Ajami discloses receive, from the first non-AP station, signaling comprising at least one of an address of the group of at least two non-APs or an address of a single non-AP station and a transmission opportunity (TXOP) sharing request indication, because Ajami teaches the AP receiving, from a node, a request for a setting associated with a shared TXOP (Ajami, para. [0006] “a first frame that includes a request for a network allocation vector (NAV) setting associated with a shared transmission opportunity (TXOP)”).
Furthermore, Ajami discloses transmit, to the first non-AP station, a response comprising a TXOP sharing indication, because Ajami teaches transmitting a frame that permits a node to transmit during a TXOP shared with a second node (Ajami, para. [0004] “allow, during a transmit opportunity (TXOP) shared with a second wireless node, a third wireless node to transmit to the second wireless node”).
Although Ajami teaches transmitting a TXOP-sharing response to the first non-AP station (Ajami, para. [0004]), Ajami does not explicitly disclose transmitting additional such responses respectively to additional non-AP stations of the group. But Ajami does not explicitly disclose: transmit, to additional non-AP stations in the group of at least two non-AP stations, additional responses respectively comprising TXOP sharing indications,
However, Ajami in view of Hedayat teaches making the shared resource units available to plural guest stations of the group (Hedayat, para. [0088] “the shared RUs, available for one or more guest STA”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include, in the shared-transmission trigger frame of Hedayat, the per-portion scheduling information of Ajami so as to coordinate the transmissions of the group of guest stations within the shared TXOP, a combination of prior-art elements according to known methods yielding the predictable result of collision-free multi-station transmission within a single obtained TXOP (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 17, Hedayat discloses The AP of claim 16, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AP to: transmit, to one or more non-AP stations of the group of at least two non-AP stations, one or more null data packet feedback report polls (NFRPs), because Hedayat teaches a trigger type that indicates a null data packet feedback report poll (Hedayat, para. [0018] “Trigger Type subfield value of 7 indicates NDP Feedback Report Poll (NFRP)”).
Accordingly, the combination is obvious for the reasons given for claim 16 (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 18, Ajami discloses The AP of claim 16, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AP to: transmit, to one or more non-AP stations of the group of at least two non-AP stations, one or more request to send (RTS) messages, wherein durations of the RTS messages are maximum allowed sharing durations, because Ajami teaches protecting the shared TXOP by an RTS/CTS exchange (Ajami, para. [0112] “a short duration RTS/CTS frame exchange to ensure that the TXOP shared STA is ready”), and setting the RTS duration to the maximum allowed sharing duration is a predictable use of the known RTS duration field to reserve the shared TXOP (MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Regarding claim 19, Ajami discloses The AP of claim 18, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AP to: receive, from one or more non-AP stations of the group of at least two non-AP stations, one or more control frames, wherein durations of the control frames indicate requested durations less than or equal to the maximum allowed sharing durations, because Ajami teaches that each station requesting no more than the advertised maximum is the predictable, reciprocal response to the maximum-duration RTS of claim 18, an obvious bounded negotiation of the shared duration yielding predictable results (MPEP 2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 20, although Ajami teaches releasing the medium when a shared station completes early (Ajami, para. [0119]) but Ajami does not in a single passage recite the PIFS recovery: The AP of claim 19, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AP to: perform, in response to one or more non-AP stations of the group of at least two non-AP stations completing a transmission before an assigned time, a point coordination function interframe space (PIFS) recovery of the access channel,
However, Hedayat teaches that a point coordination function interframe space governs access to the shared channel (Hedayat, para. [0105] “Point Coordination Function (PCF) Inter Frame Space (IFS) (PIFS)”).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teachings of Heayat to recover the access channel a point coordination function interframe space after a station completes its transmission before its assigned time so as to reuse the released medium, a use of a known technique to yield the predictable result of prompt channel reuse (MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST
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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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.
/CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JAY L VOGEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights