DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-7 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-7 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of copending Application No. 18/978067 (reference application).
Regarding claim 1, copending Application 18/978067 teaches:
An information presentation device comprising:
one or more speakers configured to present an occupant of a vehicle with audio information (claim 1 “one or more speakers configured to present audio information ... to an occupant of the vehicle”);
one or more acceleration detectors configured to respectively output one or more acceleration signals respectively indicating vertical acceleration rates of one or more unsprung components that make relative displacements to a vehicle body of the vehicle in accordance with strokes of one or more suspensions that respectively support one or more wheels of the vehicle (claim 1 “one or more acceleration detectors configured to output one or more acceleration signals indicating acceleration rates in a front-rear direction of one or more unsprung components, the one or more unsprung components being displaced relative to a vehicle body in accordance with strokes of one or more suspensions that support one or more wheels of the vehicle”); and
a processor configured to perform filter processing with a predetermined frequency band on the one or more acceleration signals (claim 1 “a processor configured to perform filter processing on the one or more acceleration signals such that a component of a predetermined frequency band .... is emphasized over components of other frequency bands”) and output one or more resultant signals as one or more driving signals respectively to the one or more speakers (claim 1 “output one or more resultant signals as one or more driving signals to the one or more speakers.”).
Claims 2-7 of the present invention are respectively rejected in view of claims 2-7 of copending Application 18/978067.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-7 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of copending Application No. 18/978086 (reference application).
Regarding claim 1, copending Application 18/978086 teaches:
An information presentation device comprising:
one or more speakers configured to present an occupant of a vehicle with audio information (claim 1 “one or more speakers configured to present audio information ... to an occupant of the vehicle”);
one or more acceleration detectors configured to respectively output one or more acceleration signals respectively indicating vertical acceleration rates of one or more unsprung components that make relative displacements to a vehicle body of the vehicle in accordance with strokes of one or more suspensions that respectively support one or more wheels of the vehicle (claim 1 “one or more acceleration detectors configured to output one or more acceleration signals indicating lateral acceleration rates of one or more unsprung components, the one or more unsprung components being displaced relative to a vehicle body of the vehicle in accordance with strokes of one or more suspensions that support one or more wheels of the vehicle”); and
a processor configured to perform filter processing with a predetermined frequency band on the one or more acceleration signals (claim 1 “a processor configured to perform filter processing on the one or more acceleration signals to emphasize a predetermined frequency band”) and output one or more resultant signals as one or more driving signals respectively to the one or more speakers (claim 1 “output one or more driving signals to the one or more speakers in accordance with the one or more acceleration signals subjected to the filter processing”).
Claims 2-5 of the present invention are respectively rejected in view of claims 2-5 of copending Application 18/978086.
Claims 6-7 of the present invention are respectively rejected in view of claims 8-9 of copending Application 18/978086.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 4-7 are 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.
Claims 4-5 recite the limitation “with emphasis on a component of the predetermined frequency band.” The metes and bounds of the term “with emphasis” cannot be ascertained as this could mean excluding the use of other frequency bands, prioritizing the predetermined frequency band while also using other frequency bands, or other variations of “emphasis.” Therefore, this limitation renders the claim unclear and indefinite. For examination purposes, this limitation is interpreted as performing the filtering processing with only the predetermined frequency band.
Claims 6-7 are rejected for being dependent upon previously rejected base claims 4-5, respectively.
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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimokawa et al. (JP 2007155525 A), hereinafter Shimokawa (see attached translation).
Regarding claim 1, Shimokawa teaches:
An information presentation device comprising:
one or more speakers configured to present an occupant of a vehicle with audio information (Par. 30 “the tire pressure or its abnormality through voice or buzzer sound through the driver A warning speaker, a warning buzzer, etc. to report are applicable.”);
one or more acceleration detectors (Par. 20 “acceleration sensor 1”) configured to respectively output one or more acceleration signals respectively indicating vertical acceleration rates of one or more unsprung components (Par. 68 “In the first and second embodiments, the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect the vertical vibration of the vehicle unsprung portion”) that make relative displacements to a vehicle body of the vehicle in accordance with strokes of one or more suspensions that respectively support one or more wheels of the vehicle (Par. 20 “The acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect vertical acceleration under the vehicle spring, detects vertical vibration (displacement) under the vehicle spring as acceleration”; Par. 21 “As shown in FIG. 2, the acceleration sensor 1 is attached to the lower part of the vehicle spring. In other words, each wheel 5 is attached to the vehicle body via the suspension 4 but is attached to the wheel 5 side”; and
a processor (Par. 22 “arithmetic device 2”) configured to perform filter processing with a predetermined frequency band (Par. 25 “for example, a signal in a frequency band of 60 to 110 (preferably 120) Hz.”) on the one or more acceleration signals (Par. 23 “the calculation device 2 includes a band pass filter 2a”; Par. 24 “The band pass filter 2a extracts a signal in a frequency band determined from the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1.”; Pars. 25-26) and output one or more resultant signals as one or more driving signals respectively to the one or more speakers (Par. 30 “The notification device 3 is for notifying the driver that an abnormality has occurred in the tire pressure itself or the tire pressure. For example, ... the tire pressure or its abnormality through voice or buzzer sound through the driver A warning speaker, a warning buzzer, etc. to report are applicable.”).
Regarding claim 4, Shimokawa further teaches:
wherein the processor comprises an acceleration signal processor configured to generate the audio information from the one or more acceleration signals, with emphasis on a component of the predetermined frequency band over components of other frequency bands (Pars. 25-30; Par. 25 discloses “The band pass filter 2a extracts a signal in a frequency band determined in advance based on the frequency characteristics of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1, for example, a signal in a frequency band of 60 to 110 (preferably 120) Hz.” – Extracted acceleration signal in the frequency band 60-100 Hz is used for calculation of the tire pressure (disclosed in Pars. 27-29, which is notified to a driver via the notification device 3 (Par. 30)).
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, 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, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimokawa et al. (JP 2007155525 A), in view of Brummer et al. (US 2021/0297769 A1), hereinafter Brummer.
Regarding claim 2, Shimokawa does not explicitly teach a plurality of wheels, a plurality of speakers, a plurality of unsprung components, a plurality of acceleration signals, the one or more acceleration detectors are configured to respectively output the acceleration signals of the unsprung components provided on the wheels respectively, the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the acceleration signals detected at the unsprung components, with sound image localization that differs with positions of the wheels on which the unsprung components are provided.
However, Shimokawa teaches a wheel (Fig. 2; Par. 25 “wheel 5”), a speaker (Par. 30 “notification device 3”), an unsprung component (Fig. 2; Par. 25 “hub 7”), an acceleration signal (Par. 20 “The acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect vertical acceleration under the vehicle spring, detects vertical vibration (displacement) under the vehicle spring as acceleration”), the acceleration detector is configured to output the acceleration signal of the unsprung component (Par. 20 “The acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect vertical acceleration under the vehicle spring, detects vertical vibration (displacement) under the vehicle spring as acceleration, and outputs a detection signal corresponding to the acceleration.”); and the speaker is configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the acceleration signal detected at the unsprung component (Pars. 25-30; Par. 25 discloses “The band pass filter 2a extracts a signal in a frequency band determined in advance based on the frequency characteristics of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1, for example, a signal in a frequency band of 60 to 110 (preferably 120) Hz.” – Extracted acceleration signal in the frequency band 60-100 Hz is used for calculation of the tire pressure (disclosed in Pars. 27-29, which is notified to a driver via the notification device 3 (Par. 30)).
Therefore, 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 of Shimokawa to include a plurality of wheels, a plurality of speakers, a plurality of unsprung components, a plurality of acceleration signals, the one or more acceleration detectors are configured to respectively output the acceleration signals of the unsprung components provided on the wheels respectively, and the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the acceleration signals detected at the unsprung components, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In addition, in the same field of endeavor, Brummer teaches:
a plurality of wheels (Fig. 1 illustrates a vehicle with four wheels shown in black);
a plurality of speakers ([0047] “[0047] “At least one tire loudspeaker is assigned to each tire.”);
the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information with sound image localization that differs with positions of the wheels ([0046] “the control unit activates only the tire loudspeaker or those tire loudspeakers that is/are assigned to the tire for which the low tire pressure signal or the flat tire signal is intended.”; [0047] “At least one tire loudspeaker is assigned to each tire. The term “assignment” includes an arrangement of one or multiple tire loudspeaker(s) in the proximity of the particular tire. For example, a tire loudspeaker or multiple tire loudspeakers, which is/are assigned to the front right tire (i.e., the tire on the passenger side), can be arranged in the dashboard on the passenger side and/or in or at the side lining on the passenger side and/or in the roof lining area on the passenger side and/or in the floor area on the passenger side and/or in or at the passenger vehicle seat.”).
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 of Shimokawa to configure the speakers to present the occupant of the vehicle with audio information with sound image localization that differs with positions of the wheels, as taught by Brummer. Such modification allows the vehicle occupant to instinctively perceive the low tire pressure signal or a flat tire signal as a warning signal due to the arrangement of the tire speakers in the proximity of the particular tire, as stated by Brummer in [0046].
Regarding claim 3, Shimokawa does not specifically teach wherein the vehicle comprises a four-wheel vehicle with a right front wheel, a left front wheel, a right rear wheel, and a left rear wheel; the one or more acceleration detectors are configured to respectively output the one or more acceleration signals of the one or more unsprung components provided on the right front wheel, the left front wheel, the right rear wheel, and the left rear wheel, the one or more speakers comprise a plurality of speakers, and the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the one or more acceleration signals of the one or more unsprung components provided on the right front wheel, the left front wheel, the right rear wheel, and the left rear wheel, with sound image localization right frontward, left frontward, right rearward, and left rearward of a headrest of a driver’s seat of the vehicle.
However, Shimokawa teaches a wheel (Fig. 2; Par. 25 “wheel 5”), a speaker (Par. 30 “notification device 3”), an unsprung component (Fig. 2; Par. 25 “hub 7”), an acceleration signal (Par. 20 “The acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect vertical acceleration under the vehicle spring, detects vertical vibration (displacement) under the vehicle spring as acceleration”), the acceleration detector is configured to output the acceleration signal of the unsprung component provided on the wheel (Par. 20 “The acceleration sensor 1 is used to detect vertical acceleration under the vehicle spring, detects vertical vibration (displacement) under the vehicle spring as acceleration, and outputs a detection signal corresponding to the acceleration.”); and the speaker is configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the acceleration signal detected at the unsprung component provided on the wheel (Pars. 25-30; Par. 25 discloses “The band pass filter 2a extracts a signal in a frequency band determined in advance based on the frequency characteristics of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1, for example, a signal in a frequency band of 60 to 110 (preferably 120) Hz.” – Extracted acceleration signal in the frequency band 60-100 Hz is used for calculation of the tire pressure (disclosed in Pars. 27-29, which is notified to a driver via the notification device 3 (Par. 30)).
Therefore, 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 of Shimokawa to include a plurality of wheels, a plurality of speakers, a plurality of unsprung components provided on each wheel of the plurality of wheels, a plurality of acceleration signals, the one or more acceleration detectors are configured to respectively output the acceleration signals of the unsprung components provided on the wheels respectively, and the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information in accordance with the acceleration signals detected at the unsprung components provided on each wheel of the plurality of wheels, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Shimokawa does not specifically teach the plurality of wheels comprises a four-wheel vehicle with a right front wheel, a left front wheel, a right rear wheel, and a left rear wheel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Brummer teaches:
wherein the vehicle comprises a four-wheel vehicle with a right front wheel, a left front wheel, a right rear wheel, and a left rear wheel (Fig. 1 illustrates a four-wheel vehicle with a right front wheel, a left front wheel, a right rear wheel, and a left rear wheel shown in black);
the one or more speakers comprise a plurality of speakers ([0047] “[0047] “At least one tire loudspeaker is assigned to each tire.”);
the speakers are configured to present the occupant of the vehicle with the audio information with sound image localization right frontward, left frontward, right rearward, and left rearward of a headrest of a driver’s seat of the vehicle ([0046] “the control unit activates only the tire loudspeaker or those tire loudspeakers that is/are assigned to the tire for which the low tire pressure signal or the flat tire signal is intended ... Due to the arrangement of the tire loudspeakers in the proximity of the particular tire, the low tire pressure signal or a flat tire signal can be instinctively perceived by a vehicle occupant as a warning signal, which originates from the particular defective tire.”; [0047] “At least one tire loudspeaker is assigned to each tire. The term “assignment” includes an arrangement of one or multiple tire loudspeaker(s) in the proximity of the particular tire. For example, a tire loudspeaker or multiple tire loudspeakers, which is/are assigned to the front right tire (i.e., the tire on the passenger side), can be arranged in the dashboard on the passenger side and/or in or at the side lining on the passenger side and/or in the roof lining area on the passenger side and/or in the floor area on the passenger side and/or in or at the passenger vehicle seat.”).
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 of Shimokawa to configure the speakers to present the occupant of the vehicle with audio information with sound image localization right frontward, left frontward, right rearward, and left rearward of a headrest of a driver’s seat of the vehicle, as taught by Brummer. Such modification allows the vehicle occupant to instinctively perceive the low tire pressure signal or a flat tire signal as a warning signal due to the arrangement of the tire speakers in the proximity of the particular tire, as stated by Brummer in [0046].
Regarding claim 5, Shimokawa further teaches:
wherein the processor comprises an acceleration signal processor configured to generate the audio information from the one or more acceleration signals, with emphasis on a component of the predetermined frequency band over components of other frequency bands (Pars. 25-30; Par. 25 discloses “The band pass filter 2a extracts a signal in a frequency band determined in advance based on the frequency characteristics of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1, for example, a signal in a frequency band of 60 to 110 (preferably 120) Hz.” – Extracted acceleration signal in the frequency band 60-100 Hz is used for calculation of the tire pressure (disclosed in Pars. 27-29, which is notified to a driver via the notification device 3 (Par. 30)).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimokawa et al. (JP 2007155525 A), in view of Ishiyama (JP 2006007913 A), hereinafter Ishiyama (see attached translation).
Regarding claim 6, Shimokawa further teaches:
the predetermined frequency band comprises a frequency of vibration to be generated in accompaniment with the strokes of the suspensions (Par. 26 “The frequency characteristic of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1 that fluctuates due to the vertical vibration under the vehicle spring has a waveform as shown in FIG. 3, for example, and has a shape having a plurality of amplitudes. Among these, the amplitude existing in the range of 60 to 110 Hz is generated due to tire air pressure”) and a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle.
Shimokawa does not specifically teach the predetermined frequency band comprises a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ishiyama teaches:
a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle ([0021] “ Since the tire is a structural body, it has a natural frequency, and generally has a natural frequency in the front-rear direction near 50 Hz and a natural frequency in the vertical direction near 100 Hz.”).
Therefore, 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 predetermined frequency band of Shimokawa to include a natural frequency (100 Hz) of one or more tires of the vehicle, since Shimokawa has already taught a predetermined frequency band of 60-110 Hz, which also includes a natural frequency value (100 Hz) of a tire. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimokawa et al. (JP 2007155525 A), in view of Brummer et al. (US 2021/0297769 A1), and further in view of Ishiyama (JP 2006007913 A).
Regarding claim 7, Shimokawa further teaches:
the predetermined frequency band comprises a frequency of vibration to be generated in accompaniment with the strokes of the suspensions (Par. 26 “The frequency characteristic of the detection signal of the acceleration sensor 1 that fluctuates due to the vertical vibration under the vehicle spring has a waveform as shown in FIG. 3, for example, and has a shape having a plurality of amplitudes. Among these, the amplitude existing in the range of 60 to 110 Hz is generated due to tire air pressure”) and a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle.
Neither Shimokawa nor Brummer specifically teaches the predetermined frequency band comprises a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ishiyama teaches:
a natural frequency of one or more tires of the vehicle ([0021] “ Since the tire is a structural body, it has a natural frequency, and generally has a natural frequency in the front-rear direction near 50 Hz and a natural frequency in the vertical direction near 100 Hz.”).
Therefore, 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 predetermined frequency band of Shimokawa, in view of Brummer, to include a natural frequency (100 Hz) of one or more tires of the vehicle, since Shimokawa has already taught a predetermined frequency band of 60-110 Hz, which also includes a natural frequency value (100 Hz) of a tire. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NHI Q BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-3962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 10:00 AM - 6:00PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KHOI TRAN can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/NHI Q BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights