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 . In communications filed on 12/03/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending in this examination.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. This examination is in response to US Patent Application No. 18/967,549.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8-11, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Stewart (US2005/0123133).
Regarding claim 1, Stewart discloses a method performed by a first device in wireless communication comprising:[0006] The emerging RFID technology employs a radio frequency ("RF") wireless link and ultra-small, embedded computer chips, to overcome these barcode limitations. RFID technology allows physical objects to be identified and tracked via these wireless "tags". It functions like a bar code that communicates to the reader automatically without needing manual line-of-sight scanning or singulation of the objects. RFID promises to radically transform the retail, pharmaceutical, military, and transportation industries.
transmitting, to a second device, a first message for initiating a handshake process between the first device and the second device, wherein the first message at least includes a first key generation parameter of the first device; receiving, from the second device, a second message as a response to the first message, wherein the second message at least includes a second key generation parameter of the second device [0064] A first embodiment provides a process for simple, secure exchange of random numbers. FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of a general overview of the method 200. In operation 202, a first device, e.g., a reader generates a first challenge code (C1) including a random number( equated to first key generation parameter). In operation 204, a second device, e.g., a tag, receives the challenge (C1). In operation 206, the tag uses a "known secret" to decode the first challenge (C1) and extract the random number from the first device. Using this decoded random number from first device, the tag encodes a response (C2) in operation 208( equated to second message), the response (C2) including a random number from the second device (equated to first key generation parameter. In operation 210, the first device, upon receiving the challenge response (C2), decodes the second challenge (C2) and retrieves the random number of the second device.
and a checking parameter generated by the second device at least based on the first key generation parameter and the second key generation parameter [0074] The tag generates a random number (RN16_T) 306, either before or after receiving the first challenge (C1) 304. The tag( equated to second device) then combines this second random number (RN16_T) 306 with the decoded first random number (RN16_R) from the reader in the first challenge (C1) 304 using an Exclusive OR function( equated to checking parameter) to generate a second challenge (C2) 308].
and transmitting, to the second device, a third message for confirming a success of the handshake process, in response to verifying the checking parameter of the second message [0075] The second challenge code (C2) 308 is then transmitted to the reader( equated to third message) . [0076] The reader receives the second challenge (C2) 308 and uses its previously generated random number (RN16_R) 302 to perform an inverse Exclusive OR on the challenge (C2) 308 and retrieve the tag's random number 306], and [0078] Now the reader has a secure version of the tag's RN16_T 306 and the tag has a secure version of the reader's RN16_R 302. Additional exchange cycles may be completed to exchange "larger" blocks of data using new versions of the random numbers from the reader and/or the tag].
Regarding claim 8, Stewart discloses , wherein verifying the checking parameter of the second message includes: determining whether the checking parameter of the second message received from the second device matches with a peer checking parameter generated by the first device at least based on the first key generation parameter and the second key generation parameter.[0074] The tag generates a random number (RN16_T) 306, either before or after receiving the first challenge (C1) 304. The tag( equated to second device) then combines this second random number (RN16_T) 306 with the decoded first random number (RN16_R) from the reader in the first challenge (C1) 304 using an Exclusive OR function( equated to checking parameter) to generate a second challenge (C2) 308].
[0096] In operation 414, the tag sends the second challenge (C2) to the reader. In operation 416, the reader receives and decodes the second challenge (C2). In operation 418, the reader receives the second challenge (C2) and checks the RN16_T with the second CRC. If the CRC doesn't match the RN16_T, the reader will not accept the challenge (C2).
Regarding claim 9, Stewart discloses, wherein the first and second key generation parameters are used to generate a first communication key at the first device and generate a second communication key at the second device, and wherein the first and second communication keys are respectively installed in the first and second devices for subsequent communication between the first and second devices [0096-0097] In operation 414, the tag sends the second challenge (C2) to the reader. In operation 416, the reader receives and decodes the second challenge (C2). In operation 418, the reader receives the second challenge (C2) and checks the RN16_T with the second CRC. If the CRC doesn't match the RN16_T, the reader will not accept the challenge (C2). For subsequent data transmissions protected by random numbers, the reader and tag can continue to use CRCs to authenticate the transmissions.
Regarding claim 10, Stewart discloses, the checking parameter is an integrity checking code (MIC) for checking whether the first and second communication keys are matched [0096] In operation 414, the tag sends the second challenge (C2) to the reader. In operation 416, the reader receives and decodes the second challenge (C2). In operation 418, the reader receives the second challenge (C2) and checks the RN16_T with the second CRC. If the CRC doesn't match the RN16_T, the reader will not accept the challenge (C2).
[0097] For subsequent data transmissions protected by random numbers, the reader and tag can continue to use CRCs to authenticate the transmissions.
Regarding claim 11, Stewart discloses, wherein the first key generation parameter is a first Nonce of the first device, and the second key generation parameter is a second Nonce of the second device [0064] A first embodiment provides a process for simple, secure exchange of random numbers. FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of a general overview of the method 200. In operation 202, a first device, e.g., a reader generates a first challenge code (C1) including a random number( equated to first key generation parameter). In operation 204, a second device, e.g., a tag, receives the challenge (C1). In operation 206, the tag uses a "known secret" to decode the first challenge (C1) and extract the random number from the first device. Using this decoded random number from first device, the tag encodes a response (C2) in operation 208( equated to second message), the response (C2) including a random number from the second device (equated to first key generation parameter. In operation 210, the first device, upon receiving the challenge response (C2), decodes the second challenge (C2) and retrieves the random number of the second device.
Regarding claims 16, and 20 , these claims are interpreted and rejected for the same rational set forth in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 of this title, 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 2-3, 5-6, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 2005/0123133issue to Stewart , and in view of US Patent Application No. (2024/0056804) issued to Dhanasekaran.
Regarding claim 2, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however, Dhanasekaran discloses wherein the first device is a target access point (AP) device, and the second device is a non-AP device connected with a source AP device different from the target AP device, and the method further comprising: detecting whether the non-AP device enters into a coverage area of the target AP device, wherein the first message is transmitted in response to detecting that the non-AP device enters into the coverage area of the target AP device.
[Abstract, there is provided an apparatus comprising means for determining a change of connection at a user equipment from a source access point to a target access point, and means for receiving, from the target access point, an indication that an associated gateway function is the same for the source access point and the target access point. The apparatus also comprising means for generating an access point key based on the received indication from the target access point and means for securing communications with the target access point using the generated access point key], and [¶11].
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 teaching of Stewart by incorporating “ change triggering apparatus ”, as taught by Dhanasekaran. One could have been motivated to do so in order to change of connection from a source access point to a target access point at the user equipment. [ Dhanasekaran, Abstract, ¶11].
The method of claim 3, The combination of Stewart and Dhanasekaran discloses:
wherein the first message is an invitation message for inviting the non-AP device to transition from the source AP device to the target AP device through the handshake process therebetween; the second message is an accept message for accepting the invitation; and the third message is a confirm message for confirming a success of the transition.
Stewart discloses: [ ¶¶64, 75]
Dhanasekaran discloses: [Abstract, there is provided an apparatus comprising means for determining a change of connection at a user equipment from a source access point to a target access point, and means for receiving, from the target access point, an indication that an associated gateway function is the same for the source access point and the target access point. The apparatus also comprising means for generating an access point key based on the received indication from the target access point and means for securing communications with the target access point using the generated access point key].
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 teaching of Stewart by incorporating “ change triggering apparatus ”, as taught by Dhanasekaran. One could have been motivated to do so in order to change of connection from a source access point to a target access point at the user equipment. [ Dhanasekaran, Abstract, ¶11].
The method of claim 5, The combination of Stewart and Dhanasekaran discloses wherein the first device is a non-access point (non-AP) device connected with a source AP device, and the second device is a target AP device different from the source AP device, and the method further comprising: detecting whether a transition from the source AP device to the target AP device is needed, wherein the first message is transmitted in response to detecting that the transition from the source AP device to the target AP device is needed [Abstract, There is provided an apparatus comprising means for determining a change of connection at a user equipment from a source access point to a target access point, and means for receiving, from the target access point, an indication that an associated gateway function is the same for the source access point and the target access point. The apparatus also comprising means for generating an access point key based on the received indication from the target access point, and means for securing communications with the target access point using the generated access point key], and [¶11].
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 teaching of Stewart by incorporating “ change triggering apparatus ”, as taught by Dhanasekaran. One could have been motivated to do so in order to change of connection from a source access point to a target access point at the user equipment. [ Dhanasekaran, Abstract, ¶11].
Regarding claim 6, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however, Dhanasekaran discloses wherein the first message is an authentication request message for requesting the transition from the source AP device to the target AP device; the second message is an authentication response message for responding to the authentication request message; and the third message is an confirm message for confirming a success of the transition.[0248] The mobility of a UE between two TNAPs within the same TNGF is not currently supported in 3GPP without a disconnection to the source TNAP and then re-connecting to the target TNAP.
[0249] For example, when a UE moves between two nearby or overlapping TNAPS, for example, TNAP1 to TNAP2, then the connectivity will break. Therefore, UE services will be interrupted. The UE needs to reconnect and go through another authentication procedure to continue the service, even though TNAP1 and TNAP2 connect to the same 5GC. This deployment scenario may exist in, for example, enterprise networks or enterprise networks overlapping with public switched telephone network (PSTN) deployed Wi-Fi.
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 teaching of Stewart by incorporating “ change triggering apparatus ”, as taught by Dhanasekaran. One could have been motivated to do so in order to change of connection from a source access point to a target access point at the user equipment. [ Dhanasekaran, Abstract, ¶11].
Regarding claim 17, this claim is interpreted and rejected for the same rational set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, this claim is interpreted and rejected for the same rational set forth in claim 5.
Claims 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 2005/0123133issue to Stewart , and in view of US Patent Application No. (2024/0056804) issued to Dhanasekaran, and further in view of ( US2021/0120602) issued to Huang.
Regarding claim 4, Dhanasekaran does not explicitly disclose, however, the combination of Stewart and Huang discloses: wherein the invitation message includes a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE) at least including the first key generation parameter; the accept message includes a second FTIE at least including the first and second key generation parameters and the checking parameter; and the confirm message includes a third FTIE at least including the first and second key generation parameters.
Stewart discloses: [ ¶¶64, 75]
Huang discloses [¶62, FIG. 4 illustrates an FT initial mobility domain setup in accordance with some aspects. In particular, FIG. 4 illustrates a flow for the initial association in an RSN between a STA and an AP, including an authentication request/response exchange to achieve open system authentication, which admits any STA to the DS. After the authentication request/response exchange, an association request/response is used to exchange mobility domain information in mobility domain element (MDE) and FT information in a Fast BSS Transition element (FTE). Then 802.1X EAP authentication is used to generate Pairwise Master Key (PMK)-R0, to be used to generate any PMK-R1, and PMK-R1 between the pair of AP and STA. A FT 4-way handshake is used to generate the Pairwise Transit Key (PTK) and deliver GTK, IGTK, BIGTK], and [Abstract].
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 teaching of Stewart , and Dhanasekaran by incorporating “implementation of a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE)”, as taught by Huang. One could have been motivated to do so in order to describe the process of transitions in multi-link device (MLD) devices. The MAC addresses of the AP MLD and non-AP MLD are used to generate keys for different fast transitions (FT) between a non-AP MLD and an AP MLD. In an FT initial mobility domain operation, the AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S0KH-ID and S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in a single FT 4-way handshake. In a fast MLD transition to an AP MLD in the same ESS, the other AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in an FTE. [ Huang, Abstract, ].
Regarding claim 7, Dhanasekaran does not explicitly disclose, however, the combination of Stewart and Huang discloses: wherein the authentication request message includes a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE) at least including the first key generation parameter, the authentication response message includes a second FTIE at least including the first and second key generation parameters and the checking parameter, and the confirm message includes a third FTIE including the first and second key generation parameters.
Stewart discloses: [ ¶¶64, 75]
Huang discloses: [0062] FIG. 4 illustrates an FT initial mobility domain setup in accordance with some aspects. In particular, FIG. 4 illustrates a flow for the initial association in an RSN between a STA and an AP, including an authentication request/response exchange to achieve open system authentication, which admits any STA to the DS. After the authentication request/response exchange, an association request/response is used to exchange mobility domain information in mobility domain element (MDE) and FT information in a Fast BSS Transition element (FTE). Then 802.1X EAP authentication is used to generate Pairwise Master Key (PMK)-R0, to be used to generate any PMK-R1, and PMK-R1 between the pair of AP and STA. A FT 4-way handshake is used to generate the Pairwise Transit Key (PTK) and deliver GTK, IGTK, BIGTK.
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 teaching of Stewart , and Dhanasekaran by incorporating “implementation of a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE)”, as taught by Huang. One could have been motivated to do so in order to describe the process of transitions in multi-link device (MLD) devices. The MAC addresses of the AP MLD and non-AP MLD are used to generate keys for different fast transitions (FT) between a non-AP MLD and an AP MLD. In an FT initial mobility domain operation, the AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S0KH-ID and S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in a single FT 4-way handshake. In a fast MLD transition to an AP MLD in the same ESS, the other AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in an FTE. [ Huang, Abstract, ].
Claims 12, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 2005/0123133issue to Stewart , and in view of US Patent Application No. (2021/0067961) issued to Dhammawat.
Regarding claim 12, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however Dhammawat discloses, wherein the first key generation parameter is a first public key of the first device, and the second key generation parameter is a second public key of the second device [ Abstract, A Secure Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) anti-clogging mechanism may be provided. A public key of an access point may be provided from the access point to a client attempting to connect with a network via the access point. The access point may receive from the client a first anti-clogging token and a public key of the client. The first anti-clogging token may be generated by the first client using a shared secret based on a private key of the client and the public key of the access point and a multiplier. The access point may generate a second anti-clogging token using a shared secret based on a private key of the access point and the public key of the client and the multiplier. The access point may then verify the first anti-clogging token and the second anti-clogging token match to authenticate the client.
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 teaching of Stewart , by incorporating “Secure Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) anti-clogging mechanism for wireless network ”, as taught by Dhammawat. One could have been motivated to do so in order to provide a public key of an access point may from the access point to a client attempting to connect with a network via the access point. The access point may receive from the client a first anti-clogging token and a public key of the client. The first anti-clogging token may be generated by the first client using a shared secret based on a private key of the client and the public key of the access point and a multiplier. The access point may generate a second anti-clogging token using a shared secret based on a private key of the access point and the public key of the client and the multiplier. The access point may then verify the first anti-clogging token and the second anti-clogging token match to authenticate the client [ Dhammawat, Abstract].
Regarding claim 15, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however Dhammawat discloses wherein the handshake process is initiated by the first device for Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) authentication between the first and the second devices.[ Abstract, A Secure Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) anti-clogging mechanism may be provided. A public key of an access point may be provided from the access point to a client attempting to connect with a network via the access point. The access point may receive from the client a first anti-clogging token and a public key of the client. The first anti-clogging token may be generated by the first client using a shared secret based on a private key of the client and the public key of the access point and a multiplier. The access point may generate a second anti-clogging token using a shared secret based on a private key of the access point and the public key of the client and the multiplier. The access point may then verify the first anti-clogging token and the second anti-clogging token match to authenticate the client.
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 teaching of Stewart , by incorporating “Secure Simultaneous Authentication of Equals (SAE) anti-clogging mechanism for wireless network ”, as taught by Dhammawat. One could have been motivated to do so in order to provide a public key of an access point may from the access point to a client attempting to connect with a network via the access point. The access point may receive from the client a first anti-clogging token and a public key of the client. The first anti-clogging token may be generated by the first client using a shared secret based on a private key of the client and the public key of the access point and a multiplier. The access point may generate a second anti-clogging token using a shared secret based on a private key of the access point and the public key of the client and the multiplier. The access point may then verify the first anti-clogging token and the second anti-clogging token match to authenticate the client [ Dhammawat, Abstract].
Regarding claim 19, this claim is interpreted and rejected for the same rational set forth in claim 15.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 2005/0123133issue to Stewart , and in view of US Patent Application No. (2021/0120602) issued to Huang.
Regarding claim 13, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however Huang discloses, wherein the first message, the second message and the third message are directly communicated between the first device and the second device, based on an over-the-air protocol [0063] FIG. 5 illustrates over-the-air FT protocol in accordance with some aspects. In particular, FIG. 5 illustrates transition between a current AP and a Target AP. As shown, the flow for the roaming in an RSN includes the STA or FTO performing FT authentication to generate a PTK based on the PMK-R1 between the STA and the target AP. PMK-R1 is generated based on PMK-R0. The STA or FTO performs a reassociation request/response exchange with the target AP. GTK, IGTK, BIGTK are delivered by the target AP in the FTE carried in the reassociation response].
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 teaching of Stewart , by incorporating “implementation of a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE)”, as taught by Huang. One could have been motivated to do so in order to describe the process of transitions in multi-link device (MLD) devices. The MAC addresses of the AP MLD and non-AP MLD are used to generate keys for different fast transitions (FT) between a non-AP MLD and an AP MLD. In an FT initial mobility domain operation, the AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S0KH-ID and S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in a single FT 4-way handshake. In a fast MLD transition to an AP MLD in the same ESS, the other AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in an FTE. [ Huang, Abstract, ].
Regarding claim 14, Stewart does not explicitly disclose, however Huang discloses,, wherein the first message, the second message and the third message are communicated between the first device and the second device via an intermediate device connected to one of the first and second devices, based on an over-the-distribution system protocol [0096] For over-the-DS FT protocol, the STA Address field in the FT action frame is the MLD address and the Target AP address field in the FT action frame is the AP MLD address if roaming to an AP MLD. FILS authentication occurs between two MLDs.
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 teaching of Stewart , by incorporating “implementation of a first Fast Transition Information Element (FTIE)”, as taught by Huang. One could have been motivated to do so in order to describe the process of transitions in multi-link device (MLD) devices. The MAC addresses of the AP MLD and non-AP MLD are used to generate keys for different fast transitions (FT) between a non-AP MLD and an AP MLD. In an FT initial mobility domain operation, the AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S0KH-ID and S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in a single FT 4-way handshake. In a fast MLD transition to an AP MLD in the same ESS, the other AP MLD MAC address is used as the R1KH-ID and the non-AP MLD MAC address is used as the S1KH-ID. The MAC addresses are exchanged in Authentication Request/Response or Association Request/Response messages and the GTK/IGTK/BIGTK are delivered in an FTE. [ Huang, Abstract, ].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
See submitted 892 for more relevant references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHRIAR ZARRINEH whose telephone number is (571)272-1207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:30pm.
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, Jorge Ortiz-Criado can be reached at 571-272-7624. 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.
/SHAHRIAR ZARRINEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496
Prosecution Insights