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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1- 16 are pending in instant application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority based on the certified copy of the Taiwanese application (TW113100921) filed on 01/09/2024.
However, should Applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/30/2025 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Takeshi et al. [Takeshi] JP 2007135128 A in view of Tong et al. [Tong] US 20020150040 A1 and Cao et al. [Cao] US 20210126741 A1.
Regarding claim 1. Takeshi disclose a wireless transmission method, for a wireless communication network having a transmission device and a reception device, wherein the wireless transmission method comprising: transmitting, by the transmission device, a first packet including at least a partial frame check sequence (PFCS) and retransmitting the first packet to the reception device; (Page 13 , ¶ 2 , In a transmission / reception method in which a transmission device transmits a data packet to a reception device via a network, Page 1 , Last Paragraph, The transmission apparatus adds a frame check sequence (FCS) to the data packet and transmits the data packet. When the receiving apparatus detects an error in the data packet, the receiving apparatus sends back a retransmission request signal (NACK: Negative Acknowledgement) for requesting retransmission. On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet.)
Takeshi does not disclose and combining, by the transmission device, the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as a complete packet;
However, Tong discloses and combining, by the transmission device, the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as a complete packet; (Abstract, The present invention provides an automated retransmission request-based system wherein packets are continuously transmitted from a transmitter to a receiver. During reception, the receiver will send either an acknowledgement (ACK) or a negative-acknowledgement (NAK) to the transmitter, depending on whether or not the corresponding packet was properly received. In response to the NAKs, the transmitter will identify the packet that was not properly received, which is referred to as the packet for retransmission. ¶ [0031] The combining logic 40 cooperates with the retransmission protocol 34 and receives the retransmission subpackets recovered from the demodulation logic 28 to effectively recombine the subpackets into a complete packet, representing the packet for retransmission. [Examiner Note: Packets are transferred from transmitter to receiver; if packets are not properly received, the receiver send a NAK. The transmitter retrieves a copy of that same packets and retransmits subpackets. The combining logic receives the retransmission subpackets , which are recovered and combined into complete packet.])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by Takeshi with the teachings of Tong, since doing so would have helped with error correction and fewer retransmission rounds.
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein no acknowledgement (ACK) message exists in a time sequence between the first packet, transmitted by the transmission device and the retransmitted first packet.
However, Cao discloses wherein no acknowledgement (ACK) message exists in a time sequence between the first packet, transmitted by the transmission device and the retransmitted first packet. (Fig.10 A illustrates flowchart of retransmission of data packet and before retransmission condition confirms that no acknowledgement has been received.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Cao, since doing so would have reduced network overhead and faster recovery in noisy network.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Calvignac et al. [Calvignac] US 6681364 B1.
Regarding claim 2. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 1,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein a first PFCS of the at least a PFCS is determined according to frame content of a previous PFCS or the first PFCS.
However, Calvignac discloses wherein a first PFCS of the at least a PFCS is determined according to frame content of a previous PFCS or the first PFCS. (The present invention introduces a new method and system for computing a CRC code, referred to interchangeably as a frame check sequence (FCS), by regularly partitioning the original data packet into subframes and obtaining partial FCSs therefrom. The partial FCSs are subsequently added to obtain the CRC for the original data packet. Fig. 3 Illustrates through steps 306 – 312 partitioning data packets ubto subframe at step 306 abd separately processing each subframe at step 310 , wherein each such processing operations produce a remainder expressly identified as a “partial FCS corresponding to each padded subframe”. Accordingly , each partial FCS is determined according to the frame content of the particular subframe corresponding to the partial FCS.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Calvignac, since doing so would have helped with low latency , lower overhead and elimination of recalculation.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Baker et al. [Baker] US 4995083 A.
Regarding claim 3. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 1,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein a partial frame check sequence procedure between the transmission device and the reception device is determined to be activated or not according to a partial frame check sequence handshake.
However, Baker discloses wherein a partial frame check sequence procedure between the transmission device and the reception device is determined to be activated or not according to a partial frame check sequence handshake. (Page 5 , Column 4, ¶ 2 , To establish a radio link the handshake signal is sent from the calling subscriber under the control of a timer. The signal is subjected to a timeout indicating loss of handshake signals if a link is not established. When the link is established the handshake signal from the called subscriber is sent with matching security code. The handshake signal is subject to timeout. The link is cleared down when the timeouts have expired or when the call originator clears down. Page 5 ,Column 3 , ¶ 8 , A cyclic redundancy check (CRC) field 3 is appended to the control signal to enable error detection to be carried out at the receiver. The generator polynomial which results in a CRC field of 6 is given below. This generator polynomial results in the following characteristics:(a) The number of bits in the CRC field (CRC BITS)=6. [Examiner Note: calling subscriber—often referred to as the "caller" or "originating party"—is technically considered both a transmission and a reception device, cyclic redundancy check (CRC) enabled (activated) at the receiver side.])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Baker, since doing so would have helped with energy savings, dynamic negotiation and payload flexibility.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Dravida et al. [Dravida] US 6195780 B1.
Regarding claim 4. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 3,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein the partial frame check sequence handshake is to determine whether or not to activate the PFCS procedure, a length of the at least a PFCS and a length of the frame according to a PFCS request frame and a PFCS response frame.
However, Dravida discloses wherein the partial frame check sequence handshake is to determine whether or not to activate the PFCS procedure, a length of the at least a PFCS and a length of the frame according to a PFCS request frame and a PFCS response frame. (Page 9 , Column 5 , ¶ 3, Lines 15 - 22, Then, in accordance with step 210, the values for data message length, the group bit size (p) for a data message which are concurrently considered, the generating polynomial degree (r), the quantity, length, and width of the generating checkbit lookup tables, and the generator implementing geometric structure must be understood and shared by the source and destination. Page 9 , Column 5 , ¶ 3, Lines 34 - 40, Also, while the values for r and the specific generator, G(x), need to be shared (at some point prior to production of CRC checkbits) between the transmitter and receiver, the specific value for p can be independently chosen by the transmitter and receiver. Therefore, negotiations fixing these parameters are conveyed between source and destination prior to data message transmission.[Examiner Note: Data message length is considered as length of the frame and under BRI an exchange of transmission of data message between transmitter and receiver is considered as handshake. ])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Dravida, since doing so would have helped with minimized protocol overhead and reduced processing and energy consumption.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 5. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 1,
Takeshi discloses wherein the reception device is configured to determine whether content of the partial frame is correct or not according to the at least a PFCS of the first packet. (Page 2 , ¶ 4, However, according to a normal error correction method in units of packets (for example, Reed-Solomon), a large amount of time is required for computation for encoding / decoding. Page 7 ¶ 1, Provide a packet transmission / reception method and the like. Further, since complicated arithmetic processing is not required for error correction, the configuration of the receiving apparatus is simplified.)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Yang et al. [Yang] WO 2022151319 A1.
Regarding claim 6. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 1,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein when the wireless communication network is in a multi-link multi-radio scenario, a main link and a retransmission link exist between the transmission device and the reception device, the reception device is configured to combine the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as the complete packet.
However, Yang discloses wherein when the wireless communication network is in a multi-link multi-radio scenario, a main link and a retransmission link exist between the transmission device and the reception device, the reception device is configured to combine the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as the complete packet. (¶ [0034], For instance, there may be multiple links between a source (a transmitting device, e.g., a UE, BS, or an anchor node) and a destination (a receiving device, e.g., a UE, BS, or an anchor node) , with at least one or more of the links running through a relay device (e.g., an anchor node, or a UE acting as a relay) . ¶ [0034], Aspects of the present disclosure employ a UE packet ID to identify transmissions from a single source over multiple links, with related transmissions (e.g., a transmission and the corresponding retransmission following a NACK) sharing the same UE packet ID even when transmitted over different links. The destination may then use the UE packet ID to identify transmissions for soft combining.
¶ [0042] , In some aspects, the destination device may receive, via a second link different from the first link, a second data block associated with a second UE packet ID. The destination device may then perform soft combining between a first data sub-block of the plurality of data sub-blocks and the second data block to decode information data based on the first UE packet ID being the same as the second UE packet ID. For example, the second data block may be a retransmission of the first data block in a response to a NACK. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Yang, since doing so would have helped with faster decoding and jitter mitigation.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 7. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 6,
Takeshi discloses wherein the transmission device is configured to transmit the first packet via the main link and retransmit the first packet via the retransmission link.( Page 1, Last Paragraph, The transmission apparatus adds a frame check sequence (FCS) to the data packet and transmits the data packet. When the receiving apparatus detects an error in the data packet, the receiving apparatus sends back a retransmission request signal (NACK: Negative Acknowledgement) for requesting retransmission. On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet. The transmitting device repeats retransmission of the same packet until ACK is received from the receiving device.)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 8. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission method of claim 6,
Takeshi discloses wherein the reception device is configured to transmit an acknowledgement (ACK) on a link where the complete packet is combined. (Page 2, ¶ 2 , On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet. The transmitting device repeats retransmission of the same packet until ACK is received from the receiving device. Claim 2 , The transmission / reception method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the reception device confirms a frame check sequence for each fragment packet and combines the fragment packet with the upper layer packet.)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Takeshi et al. [Takeshi] JP 2007135128 A in view of Tong et al. [Tong] US 20020150040 A1 and Cao et al. [Cao] US 20210126741 A1.
Regarding claim 9. Takeshi discloses a wireless transmission system, for a wireless communication network, comprising: a transmission device, configured to transmit a first packet including at least a partial frame check sequence (PFCS) and retransmit the first packet; (Page 13 , ¶ 2 , In a transmission / reception method in which a transmission device transmits a data packet to a reception device via a network, Page 1 , Last Paragraph, The transmission apparatus adds a frame check sequence (FCS) to the data packet and transmits the data packet. When the receiving apparatus detects an error in the data packet, the receiving apparatus sends back a retransmission request signal (NACK: Negative Acknowledgement) for requesting retransmission. On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet.)
Takeshi does not disclose and a reception device, configured to combine the first packet and the retransmitted first packet from the transmission device as a complete packet;
However, Tong discloses and a reception device, configured to combine the first packet and the retransmitted first packet from the transmission device as a complete packet; (Abstract, The present invention provides an automated retransmission request-based system wherein packets are continuously transmitted from a transmitter to a receiver. During reception, the receiver will send either an acknowledgement (ACK) or a negative-acknowledgement (NAK) to the transmitter, depending on whether or not the corresponding packet was properly received. In response to the NAKs, the transmitter will identify the packet that was not properly received, which is referred to as the packet for retransmission. ¶ [0031] The combining logic 40 cooperates with the retransmission protocol 34 and receives the retransmission subpackets recovered from the demodulation logic 28 to effectively recombine the subpackets into a complete packet, representing the packet for retransmission. [Examiner Note: Packets are transferred from transmitter to receiver; if packets are not properly received, the receiver send a NAK. The transmitter retrieves a copy of that same packets and retransmits subpackets. The combining logic receives the retransmission subpackets , which are recovered and combined into complete packet.])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by Takeshi with the teachings of Tong, since doing so would have helped with error correction and fewer retransmission rounds.
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein no acknowledgement (ACK) message exists in a time sequence between the first packet, transmitted by the transmission device and the retransmitted first packet.
However, Cao discloses wherein no acknowledgement (ACK) message exists in a time sequence between the first packet, transmitted by the transmission device and the retransmitted first packet. (Fig.10 A illustrates flowchart of retransmission of data packet and before retransmission condition confirms that no acknowledgement has been received.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Cao, since doing so would have reduced network overhead and faster recovery in noisy network.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Calvignac et al. [Calvignac] US 6681364 B1.
Regarding claim 10. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 9,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein a first PFCS of the at least a PFCS is determined according to frame content of a previous PFCS or the first PFCS.
However, Calvignac discloses wherein a first PFCS of the at least a PFCS is determined according to frame content of a previous PFCS or the first PFCS. (The present invention introduces a new method and system for computing a CRC code, referred to interchangeably as a frame check sequence (FCS), by regularly partitioning the original data packet into subframes and obtaining partial FCSs therefrom. The partial FCSs are subsequently added to obtain the CRC for the original data packet. Fig. 3 Illustrates through steps 306 – 312 partitioning data packets ubto subframe at step 306 abd separately processing each subframe at step 310 , wherein each such processing operations produce a remainder expressly identified as a “partial FCS corresponding to each padded subframe”. Accordingly , each partial FCS is determined according to the frame content of the particular subframe corresponding to the partial FCS.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Calvignac, since doing so would have helped with low latency , lower overhead and elimination of recalculation.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Baker et al. [Baker] US 4995083 A.
Regarding claim 11. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 9,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein a partial frame check sequence procedure between the transmission device and the reception device is determined to be activated or not according to a partial frame check sequence handshake.
However, Baker discloses wherein a partial frame check sequence procedure between the transmission device and the reception device is determined to be activated or not according to a partial frame check sequence handshake. (Page 5 , Column 4, ¶ 2 , To establish a radio link the handshake signal is sent from the calling subscriber under the control of a timer. The signal is subjected to a timeout indicating loss of handshake signals if a link is not established. When the link is established the handshake signal from the called subscriber is sent with matching security code. The handshake signal is subject to timeout. The link is cleared down when the timeouts have expired or when the call originator clears down. Page 5 ,Column 3 , ¶ 8 , A cyclic redundancy check (CRC) field 3 is appended to the control signal to enable error detection to be carried out at the receiver. The generator polynomial which results in a CRC field of 6 is given below. This generator polynomial results in the following characteristics:(a) The number of bits in the CRC field (CRC BITS)=6. [Examiner Note: calling subscriber—often referred to as the "caller" or "originating party"—is technically considered both a transmission and a reception device, cyclic redundancy check (CRC) enabled (activated) at the receiver side.])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Baker, since doing so would have helped with energy savings, dynamic negotiation and payload flexibility.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Dravida et al. [Dravida] US 6195780 B1.
Regarding claim 12. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 11,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein the partial frame check sequence handshake is to determine whether or not to activate the PFCS procedure, a length of the at least a PFCS and a length of the frame according to a PFCS request frame and a PFCS response frame.
However, Dravida discloses wherein the partial frame check sequence handshake is to determine whether or not to activate the PFCS procedure, a length of the at least a PFCS and a length of the frame according to a PFCS request frame and a PFCS response frame. (Page 9 , Column 5 , ¶ 3, Lines 15 - 22, Then, in accordance with step 210, the values for data message length, the group bit size (p) for a data message which are concurrently considered, the generating polynomial degree (r), the quantity, length, and width of the generating checkbit lookup tables, and the generator implementing geometric structure must be understood and shared by the source and destination. Page 9 , Column 5 , ¶ 3, Lines 34 - 40, Also, while the values for r and the specific generator, G(x), need to be shared (at some point prior to production of CRC checkbits) between the transmitter and receiver, the specific value for p can be independently chosen by the transmitter and receiver. Therefore, negotiations fixing these parameters are conveyed between source and destination prior to data message transmission.[Examiner Note: Data message length is considered as length of the frame and under BRI an exchange of transmission of data message between transmitter and receiver is considered as handshake. ])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Dravida, since doing so would have helped with minimized protocol overhead and reduced processing and energy consumption.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 13. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 9,
Takeshi discloses wherein the reception device is configured to determine whether content of the partial frame is correct or not according to the at least a PFCS of the first packet. (Page 2 , ¶ 4, However, according to a normal error correction method in units of packets (for example, Reed-Solomon), a large amount of time is required for computation for encoding / decoding. Page 7 ¶ 1, Provide a packet transmission / reception method and the like. Further, since complicated arithmetic processing is not required for error correction, the configuration of the receiving apparatus is simplified.)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi in view of Yang et al. [Yang] WO 2022151319 A1.
Regarding claim 14. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 9,
Modified Takeshi does not disclose wherein when the wireless communication network is in a multi-link multi-radio scenario, a main link and a retransmission link exist between the transmission device and the reception device, the reception device is configured to combine the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as the complete packet.
However, Yang discloses wherein when the wireless communication network is in a multi-link multi-radio scenario, a main link and a retransmission link exist between the transmission device and the reception device, the reception device is configured to combine the first packet and the first packet retransmitted by the transmission device as the complete packet. (¶ [0034], For instance, there may be multiple links between a source (a transmitting device, e.g., a UE, BS, or an anchor node) and a destination (a receiving device, e.g., a UE, BS, or an anchor node) , with at least one or more of the links running through a relay device (e.g., an anchor node, or a UE acting as a relay) . ¶ [0034], Aspects of the present disclosure employ a UE packet ID to identify transmissions from a single source over multiple links, with related transmissions (e.g., a transmission and the corresponding retransmission following a NACK) sharing the same UE packet ID even when transmitted over different links. The destination may then use the UE packet ID to identify transmissions for soft combining.
¶ [0042] , In some aspects, the destination device may receive, via a second link different from the first link, a second data block associated with a second UE packet ID. The destination device may then perform soft combining between a first data sub-block of the plurality of data sub-blocks and the second data block to decode information data based on the first UE packet ID being the same as the second UE packet ID. For example, the second data block may be a retransmission of the first data block in a response to a NACK. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as taught by modified Takeshi with the teachings of Yang, since doing so would have helped with faster decoding and jitter mitigation.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 15. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 14,
Takeshi discloses wherein the transmission device is configured to transmit the first packet via the main link and retransmit the first packet via the retransmission link. ( Page 1, Last Paragraph, The transmission apparatus adds a frame check sequence (FCS) to the data packet and transmits the data packet. When the receiving apparatus detects an error in the data packet, the receiving apparatus sends back a retransmission request signal (NACK: Negative Acknowledgement) for requesting retransmission. On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet. The transmitting device repeats retransmission of the same packet until ACK is received from the receiving device.)
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over modified Takeshi.
Regarding claim 16. Modified Takeshi discloses the wireless transmission system of claim 14,
Takeshi discloses wherein the reception device is configured to transmit an acknowledgement (ACK) on a link where the complete packet is combined. (Page 2, ¶ 2 , On the other hand, the transmission apparatus retransmits the same data packet. The transmitting device repeats retransmission of the same packet until ACK is received from the receiving device. Claim 2 , The transmission / reception method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the reception device confirms a frame check sequence for each fragment packet and combines the fragment packet with the upper layer packet.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (See PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAIDEHIBEN NIRMAL PATEL whose telephone number is (571) 270-0810. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at 5712727884. 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.
/VNP/Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights