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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/11/2024 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 6, claim 6, Line 1 recites the limitation “the second message.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cominetti et al (“Cominetti,” US 20210314748) and further in view of Weinfield et al (“Weinfield,” US 20180205699).
Regarding claim 1 Cominetti discloses a driving renegotiation method performed by a roadside unit (RSU), the method comprising: (Cominetti, [0097] describes a method performed by RSU/RSE; [0038], RSU receives and sends BSM’s to vehicles)
receiving a first message from a first vehicle; (Cominetti, [0097] may be performed or implemented..by roadside equipment or unit (RSE or RSU); [0098] Method 900 receives as input a sequence of safety messages from vehicles)
confirming, based on a first hash value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle via the RSU in a previous session of the driving negotiation; (Cominetti, [0095]-[0096] each message carries hash value derived from a prior message linked to same source vehicle (i.e. source confirmed by hash chain); FIG 7 describes hash chain linking messages from the same source vehicle)
verifying, based on the first hash value in the first message, that the first message is not a tampered message; and (Cominetti, [0096] if mi's signature is authentic, the previously transmitted mi−1=(pi-1, hi−2, sigi−1) can be validated simply by checking whether hi−1=H (pi−1 ∥ hi−2). After all, attackers should be unable to forge a message with same hash as mi−1 for any collision-resistant hash function; FIG 9 (checkSig+hash match is tamper detection)
transmitting the first message to the second vehicle, (Cominetti, [0038], RSU receives and sends messages..to the TDC or vehicle equipped with an OBU; [0097] RSU performs or implements method 900 for relay)
Cominetti fails to explicitly disclose confirming, based on temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation.
However, in an analogous art, Weinfield discloses confirming, based on temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation; (Weinfield, [0003] uses the DE_Temporary ID to differentiate the surrounding vehicle..from other surrounding vehicles; [0035], BSMs contain DE_TemporaryID; [0040] memory stores BSMs in a structure pointed to or referenced by the DE_TemporaryID preserving prior-session state per vehicle)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include confirming, based on temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 2, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 1.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a first vehicle ID and a message ID of the first vehicle, (Cominetti, [0096], h_i-H(p_i/h_i-1) wherein p_i is the payload including vehicle-identifying pseudonym data U and message content; [0098]; signer’s public key U (vehicle pseudonym is the vehicle identifier used as input to the hash function H; FIG 9, Line 4 H(m_i-1, U)-hash of message content combined with vehicle pseudonym key U)
Regarding claim 3, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 2.
Cominetti further discloses further comprising:
receiving a second message from the second vehicle; and (Cominetti, [0097]-[0098] describes RSU/RSE receives sequences of messages from multiple vehicles; [0038] RSU communicates with vehicles bidirectionally)
confirming, based on a second hash value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation.(Cominetti, [0095]-[0096], FIG 7 describe the same hash chain confirmation mechanism applies to any source vehicle’s message sequence)
Weinfield further discloses confirming, based on and a temporary ID value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation (Weinfield, [0040] describes memory stores BSMs per DE_TemporaryID for each surrounding vehicle, enabling prior session identification of each vehicle independently)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include confirming, based on and a temporary ID value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 4, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 3.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the second hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a second vehicle ID and a message ID of the second vehicle (Cominetti, [0096], [0098], FIG 9 describes the same hash construction (H(m_i-1, U) applies symmetrically to any transmitting vehicle-U is that vehicle’s pseudonym (vehicle identifier), m_i-1 contains message content including message count/ID).
Regarding claim 5, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 4.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the message ID of the first hash value in the first message and the message ID of the second hash value in the second message are identical, (Cominetti, [0077] describes a Message Count: a repeating sequence incremented for every message used as session/sequence identifier; [0099] describes the order of messages can be inferred from their timestamps (or, for BSM’s message count values)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the message ID in the first message and the message ID in the second message are identical (Weinfield, [0036] each BSM also has a field named DE_MsgCount..The memory 18 also stores the MsgCount assigned to each packet in association with the DE_TemporaryID-same MsgCount used across vehicles in the same session)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the message ID in the first message and the message ID in the second message are identical. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 6, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 1.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first message or the second message is a probe vehicle data (PVD) message or a basic safety message (BSM) (Cominetti, [0075] two main data formats for conveying safety information among vehicles: Basic Safety Messages (BSM) and Cooperative Awareness Messages (CAM); [0037] Different pieces of equipment on the vehicle communicate by exchanging Basic Safety Messages (BSM))
Regarding claim 7, Cominetti discloses a driving renegotiation method performed by a first vehicle, the method comprising: (Cominetti, [0097] method 900 performed by vehicles, on-board equipment or unit (OBE or OBU), roadside equipment or unit (RSE or RSU)-vehicle side performance)
transmitting a first message including a first hash value and a temporary identification (ID) value to a second vehicle via a roadside unit (RSU); and (Cominetti, [0095]-[0096] describes transmitting vehicle generates and embeds hash value h_i in each BSM; [0078] temporary ID: a randomly generated 4-byte number included in BSM; [0038], vehicle communicates through RSU/RSE to reach other vehicles)
receiving a second message including a second hash value from the second vehicle via the RSU in response to the first message, (Cominetti, [0038]; RSU receives and sends messages bidirectionally; [0096]-[0097] receiving vehicle processes hash-chained messages; method 900 handles sequences from multiple sources)
Cominetti fails to explicitly disclose transmitting a first message including a first hash value and a temporary identification (ID) value to a second vehicle via a roadside unit (RSU); and receiving a second message including and a temporary ID value from the second vehicle in response to the first message.
However, in an analogous art, Weinfield discloses transmitting a first message including and a temporary identification (ID) value to a second vehicle (Weinfield, [0003], [0035], [0040] describes transmitting a first message including and a temporary identification (ID) value to a second vehicle)
and receiving a second message including a and a temporary ID value from the second vehicle in response to the first message; (Weinfield, [0003] uses the DE_Temporary ID to differentiate the surrounding vehicle..from other surrounding vehicles; [0035], BSMs contain DE_TemporaryID; [0040] memory stores BSMs in a structure pointed to or referenced by the DE_TemporaryID preserving prior-session state per vehicle)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include transmitting a first message including and a temporary identification (ID) value to a second vehicle; and receiving a second message including and a temporary ID value from the second vehicle in response to the first message. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 8, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 7.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first vehicle and the second vehicle are vehicles that performed a driving negotiation with each other via the RSU in a previous session of the current driving negotiation, (Cominetti, [0096] describes the hash chain links messages from same source across successive transmissions establishing session continuity)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the first vehicle and the second vehicle are vehicles that performed a driving negotiation with each other in a previous session of the current driving negotiation (Weinfield, [0003] the DSRC system uses the DE_TemporaryID to differentiate the surrounding vehicle..which is important to maintain previous state information on each surrounding vehicle; [0040], memory stores BSMs per DE_TemporaryID preserving prior-session vehicle state)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the first vehicle and the second vehicle are vehicles that performed a driving negotiation with each other in a previous session of the current driving negotiation. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 9, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 7.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a first vehicle ID and a message ID of the first vehicle, (Cominetti, [0096], [0098], FIG 9: H(m_i-1, U) where U=vehicle pseudonym key (vehicle identifier) and m_i-1-prior message content including message count (message ID))
Regarding claim 10, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 9.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first message is verified by the RSU as an untampered message based on the first hash value in the first message (Cominetti, [0096] describes hash chain verification detects forged/tampered messages—attackers should be unable to forge a message with the same hash; [0097] RSU/RSE performs method 900; FIG 9, checkSig(m_i, U) at RSU)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the first message is verified as an untampered message based on and temporary ID value in the first message, (Weinfield, [0003] the DSRC system uses the DE_TemporaryID to differentiate the surrounding vehicle..which is important to maintain previous state information on each surrounding vehicle; [0040], memory stores BSMs per DE_TemporaryID preserving prior-session vehicle state)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the first message is verified as an untampered message based on and temporary ID value in the first message. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 11, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose method of claim 9, Cominetti further discloses wherein the second hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a second vehicle ID and a message ID of the second vehicle, (Cominetti, [0096], [0098], FIG 9, same hash construction applies symmetrically to second vehicle’s transmissions)
Regarding claim 12, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 11,
Cominetti further discloses wherein the second message is verified by the RSU as an untampered message based on the second hash value and temporary ID value within the second message (Cominetti, [0096]-[0097], FIG 9, RSU/RSE verifies hash chain of messages from any source vehicle; tampered messages are filtered by failed hash match).
Weinfield further discloses wherein the second message is verified as an untampered message based on and temporary ID value within the second message (Weinfield, [0003] the DSRC system uses the DE_TemporaryID to differentiate the surrounding vehicle..which is important to maintain previous state information on each surrounding vehicle; [0040], memory stores BSMs per DE_TemporaryID preserving prior-session vehicle state)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the second message is verified as an untampered message based on and temporary ID value within the second message. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 13, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the method of claim 11,
Cominetti further discloses further comprising: transmitting another message with the first hash value, message ID to the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication; and (Cominetti, [0021] describes vehicle to vehicle (V2V)..collectively referred to as Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) communications; [0022] V2X enables several applications..vehicles can exchange or communication information; [0095]-[0096] vehicles transmit hash-chained BSMs directly to neighboring vehicles)
receiving another message with the second hash value, message ID from the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, (Cominetti, [0097], method 900 applies to vehicles, on-board equipment or OBE or OBU reaching V2V messages)
wherein another message is a basic safety message (BSM) (Cominetti, [0075], [0037] describes BSM)
Weinfield further discloses transmitting another message with and temporary ID to the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication; and receiving another message with and temporary ID from the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, wherein another message is a basic safety message (BSM).
Weinfield further discloses transmitting another message with and temporary ID to the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication; and receiving another message with and temporary ID from the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, wherein another message is a basic safety message (BSM), (Weinfield, [0003], [0040], [0010]-[0011] describes transmitting another message with and temporary ID to the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication; and receiving another message with and temporary ID from the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, wherein another message is a basic safety message (BSM)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include transmitting another message with and temporary ID to the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication; and receiving another message with and temporary ID from the second vehicle via vehicle-to-vehicle communication, wherein another message is a basic safety message (BSM). One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 14, Cominetti discloses a driving renegotiation apparatus including a roadside unit (RSU), the apparatus comprising: (Cominetti, [0029]-[0034], [0038] describes a driving renegotiation apparatus including an RSU)
a processor configured to perform at least one program command; and (Cominetti, [0029]-[0034], [0038] describes a processor configured to perform at least one program command)
a transceiver connected to the processor, (Cominetti, [0029]-[0034], [0038], [0073] describes a transceiver connected to the processor)
wherein the processor receives a first message from a first vehicle, confirms, based on a first hash value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle via the RSU in a previous session of the driving negotiation, (Cominetti, [0097]-[0098], FIG 9, processor of RSU/RSE executes method 900 receiving and verifying messages)
verifies, based on the first hash value in the first message, that the first message has not been tampered with; (Cominetti, [0096], FIG 9 describes a hash chain verification which is a tamper detection at RSU processor)
and transmits the first message to the second vehicle, (Cominetti, [0038] describes the RSU transmits to vehicles)
Cominetti fails to explicitly disclose wherein the processor receives a first message from a first vehicle, confirms, based on and temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation, verifies, based on and temporary ID value in the first message, that the first message has not been tampered with. .
However, in an analogous art, Weinfield discloses wherein the processor receives a first message from a first vehicle, confirms, based on and temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation, verifies, based on and temporary ID value in the first message, that the first message has not been tampered with; (Weinfield, [0040], [0045] describes wherein the processor receives a first message from a first vehicle, confirms, based on and temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation, verifies, based on and temporary ID value in the first message, that the first message has not been tampered with)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the processor receives a first message from a first vehicle, confirms, based on and temporary identification (ID) value in the first message, that the first vehicle is the vehicle that negotiated with a second vehicle in a previous session of the driving negotiation, verifies, based on and temporary ID value in the first message, that the first message has not been tampered with. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 15, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 14.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a first vehicle ID and a message ID of the first vehicle, (Cominetti, [0096], [0098], FIG 9; H(m_i-1, U).
Regarding claim 16, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 15.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the processor receives a second message from the second vehicle, and confirms, based on a second hash value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation, (Cominetti, [0097]-[0098] describes the RSU processor receives and verifies messages from multiple vehicles)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the processor receives a second message from the second vehicle, and confirms, based on and temporary ID value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation (Weinfield, [0040] describes the processing unit stores and correlates BSMs per DE_TemporaryID for each vehicle independently; [0045] detects and distinguishes vehicles in prior-session context)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the processor receives a second message from the second vehicle, and confirms, based on and temporary ID value in the second message, that the second vehicle is the vehicle that received a driving negotiation request from the first vehicle in the previous session of the driving negotiation. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 17, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 16.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the second hash value is a hash value obtained by hashing a second vehicle ID and a message ID of the second vehicle, (Cominetti, [0096], [0098], FIG 9 describes a symmetric hash construction applies to second vehicle)
Regarding claim 18, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 17.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the message ID of the first hash value in the first message and the message ID of the second hash value in the second message are identical, (Cominetti, [0077], [0099], describes a message count used as session/sequence anchor across all messages)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the message ID of the first hash value in the first message and the message ID of the second hash value in the second message are identical (Weinfield, [0040] describes the processing unit stores and correlates BSMs per DE_TemporaryID for each vehicle independently; [0045] detects and distinguishes vehicles in prior-session context)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the message ID of the first hash value in the first message and the message ID of the second hash value in the second message are identical. One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Regarding claim 19, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 14.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the first message or the second message is a probe vehicle data (PVD) message, (Cominetti, [0075], [0090] describe BSM and CAM/PVD messages expressly covered; [0037] other messages (i.e. Probe Data) shown in FIG 3A as message type transmitted by vehicles by the same DSRC/V2X infrastructure)
Regarding claim 20, Cominetti and Weinfield disclose the apparatus of claim 14.
Cominetti further discloses wherein the processor further transmits the first message including the first hash value, message ID, to the second vehicle, the first message being a basic safety message (BSM) (Cominetti, [0095]-[0096] each BSM transmitted includes hash value h_i embedded in message; [0078], temporary ID is mandatory BSM field; [0077], message count (message ID) is mandatory BSM field; [0038], RSU transmits BSMs to vehicles; FIG 7: BSM message format showing Cert+payload+hash+signature)
Weinfield further discloses wherein the processor further transmits the first message including and temporary ID to the second vehicle, the first message being a basic safety message (BSM) (Weinfield, [0003], [0035], [0040] describes wherein the processor further transmits the first message including and temporary ID to the second vehicle, the first message being a basic safety message (BSM))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Weinfield with the method/system of Cominetti to include wherein the processor further transmits the first message including and temporary ID to the second vehicle, the first message being a basic safety message (BSM). One would have been motivated to detect a duplicate temporary ID (Weinfield, [0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include:
US 20230143929 by Yun discloses a driving negotiation method and apparatus for supporting stability against a blind spot, an unexpected situation, etc. and a rapid judgment and response of an autonomous vehicle in various driving environments. The driving negotiation apparatus includes a wireless communication module configured to support vehicle to everything (V2X) communication and at least one processor connected to the wireless communication module. The at least one processor receives a cooperative request message from a first vehicle, broadcasts a cooperative request message and additional information required for a negotiation to surrounding vehicles, receives a cooperative response message from at least one second vehicle among the surrounding vehicles, and transmits a message indicating that the negotiation is possible or impossible to the first vehicle on the basis of the cooperative response message (Abstract)
US 20200394910A1 by Malhan discloses an infrastructure edge device is configured to generate and broadcast a proxy safety message regarding a moving object. A method for a subject vehicle to process the proxy safety message includes determining whether data provided in the proxy safety message is valid based on sensor data from one or more sensors disposed about the subject vehicle, content of the proxy safety message, or a combination thereof. The method further discards the proxy safety message in response to the proxy safety message including invalid data (See Abstract).
US 20230206751A1 by Bieger discloses the correctness of information transmitted by a vehicle is assessed. Vehicle information about vehicle characteristics of a vehicle is received, wherein a vehicle trust value is assigned to the vehicle. Detector information about the vehicle characteristics is received, which is based on a detection of the vehicle characteristics by at least one detector outside the vehicle, wherein a detector trust value is assigned to the detector. Then, the correctness of the vehicle information is assessed. A correctness value is assigned to the vehicle information, and the vehicle trust value is updated. The vehicle information may be discarded when the correctness value is too low. Vehicles with a high trust value may validate other vehicles, which may in turn validate even more vehicles. In this way, a chain of vehicles with a high trust value (or trusted vehicles) may be established, (See Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J WILCOX whose telephone number is (571)270-3774. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 A.M. to 5 P.M..
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, Luu T. Pham can be reached at (571)270-5002. 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.
/JAMES J WILCOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2439
/LUU T PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2439
Prosecution Insights