DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/12/2025, 07/01/2025 & 09/01/2025 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
Claim(s) 43 & 51 is/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.
Claim(s) 43 recites “the indication of the capability of reporting the CIR report…” but the claim does not properly depend from a pending claim previously introducing such an indication. Claim 51 contains the same defect. Consequently, it is unclear what previously recited indication forms that antecedent basis for the recited capability information and which claim limitations are intended to be incorporated into Claim(s) 43 & 51.
It appears that Claim 43 may have been intended to depend from Claim 36 and Claim 51 may have been intended to depend from Claim 49. Applicant is required to clarify the intended dependency.
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(s) 36-47, 49-53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim(s) 36-47, 49-53 allege to depend from Claim(s) 1-12 or 14, respectively. However, Claim(s) 1-34 have been cancelled. Accordingly, the pending claims do not properly incorporate the limitations of a pending base claim and fail to establish a proper dependency within the presently pending claim set.
In particular, Claim 36 refers to cancelled Claim 1, Claim 37 refers to cancelled claim 2, Claim 38 refers to cancelled Claim 1, Claim 39 refers to cancelled Claim 4, Claim(s) 40-42 refer to cancelled Claim 1 or 6, Claim(s) 43-36 refer to cancelled Claim 1, Claim 47 refers to cancelled Claim 12 and Claim(s) 49-53 refer to cancelled Claim 14.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
For the purpose of Examination on the Merits only and without formally correcting the claims, the Examiner has interpreted the claims according to their apparent intended dependencies as follows:
Claim 36 from Claim 35
Claim 37 from Claim 36
Claim 38 from Claim 35
Claim 39 from Claim 38
Claim 40 from Claim 35
Claim 41/42 from Claim 40
Claim 43 from Claim 36
Claim(s) 44-46 from Claim 35
Claim 47 from Claim 46
Claim 49 from Claim 48
Claim 50 from Claim 48
Claim 51 from Claim 49
Claim 52/53 from Claim 48.
This interpretation is made solely to facilitate compact prosecution and does not constitute an Examiner’s Amendment or correction of the claims. Applicant must amend the claims to establish the intended dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 35-36, 38, 48-49, 54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1).
Re Claim 35, 48 & 54, Mueck teaches a method of wireless communications by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
receiving, from a network entity, a configuration message comprising parameters for a channel impulse response (CIR) quantization scheme used to configure a CIR report; (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; The transmission of CIR related parameters, quantization and the sending of messages.)
performing, based on the parameters for the CIR quantization scheme, measurements to derive a quantized CIR value; and (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; CIR quantization, measuring quantized values.)
transmitting, to the network entity, the CIR report comprising the quantized CIR value, wherein the CIR report is generated based on the measurements. (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Transmitting CIR related messages comprising quantized CIR values and measurement related data.)
Re Claim 36, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting, to the network entity, an indication of a capability of reporting the CIR report, wherein the CIR quantization scheme is based on the indication and wherein performing the measurements further comprises:
quantizing, based on the CIR quantization scheme, one or more measurements for obtaining a CIR of a wireless communication channel; and (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Quantizing, based on a related CIR scheme, measurements of a wireless channel.)
generating one or more quantized values based on the measurements for obtaining the CIR. (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Generating quantized values based on the measurements.)
Re Claim 38 & 49, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
the parameters for the CIR quantization scheme comprise a set of downlink reference signals; and (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Downlink signals.)
the set of downlink reference signals comprises at least one of:
a channel measurement resource (CMR);
an interference measurement resource (IMR);
a channel state information reference signals (CSI-RSs); (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146], [0399]-[0478]; CSI related signals.)
or
a positioning reference signal (PRS).
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.
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of Wernersson et al. (US 2022/0140872 A1).
Re Claim 37, Mueck discloses the method of claim 2, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein quantizing the one or more measurements comprises: determining a spatial domain basis based on a plurality of beams that the UE configures according to the configuration message; identifying a matrix coefficient based on the CIR quantization scheme; and determining a frequency domain basis matrix for computing quantized measurements of the CIR with the spatial domain basis and the matrix coefficient.
However, in analogous art, Wernersson teaches wherein quantizing the one or more measurements comprises:
determining a spatial domain basis based on a plurality of beams that the UE configures according to the configuration message; (Wernersson; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0094]-[0098], [0135]-[0221]; Determines a set of spatial domain of DFT related beams.)
identifying a matrix coefficient based on the CIR quantization scheme; and (Wernersson; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0094]-[0098], [0135]-[0221]; Identifies complex linear combination/coefficients, a matrix and amplitude and phase components of the coefficients are quantized.)
determining a frequency domain basis matrix for computing quantized measurements of the CIR with the spatial domain basis and the matrix coefficient. (Wernersson; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0094]-[0098], [0135]-[0221]; A matrix, frequence domain related matrix, frequency transformation of related coefficients.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Wernersson to quantized measurements of spatial data for the reasons of creating a method of transmitting channel state information and obating frequence domain spatial data. (Wernersson Abstract)
Claim(s) 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of YERRAMALLI et al. (US 2022/0070028 A1).
Re Claim 39, Mueck discloses the method of claim 4, yet does not explicitly suggest further comprising: performing the measurements of each reference signal in the set of downlink reference signals; providing respective values corresponding to the measurements of each reference signal in the set of downlink reference signals as inputs to a machine-learning model; and processing, by the machine-learning model, the inputs to determine a location of the UE, wherein the machine-learning model determines one or more spatial properties of the UE based on signal measurement values in the CIR report, wherein the set of downlink reference signals are received at the UE and are based on at least one of: transmissions from a plurality of antenna ports, transmissions from a plurality of cells, transmissions from a plurality of transmission/reception points (TRPs), or transmissions corresponding to a plurality of beams, wherein the machine-learning model determines one or more spatial properties of the UE based on the CIR report.
However, in analogous art, YERRAMALLI teaches further comprising:
performing the measurements of each reference signal in the set of downlink reference signals; (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072]; The UE receives and measure reference signal information transmitted by nodes.)
providing respective values corresponding to the measurements of each reference signal in the set of downlink reference signals as inputs to a machine-learning model; and (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072], [0090]-[0100]; The measured reference signal is used to determine channel frequency responses that correspond to the CIR. The CIRs, windowing information, timing data and bandwidth information is provided to a neural network as input.)
processing, by the machine-learning model, the inputs to determine a location of the UE, wherein the machine-learning model determines one or more spatial properties of the UE based on signal measurement values in the CIR report, (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072], [0089]-[0100]; The neural network output delay, angle of arrival and angle of departure. The system determine spatial data such as LOS delay, AoA and AoD.)
wherein the set of downlink reference signals are received at the UE and are based on at least one of: (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072], [0090]-[0100]; Downlink signals transmitted to a UE.)
transmissions from a plurality of antenna ports, (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072], [0088]-[0100]; Transmission from antennas.)
transmissions from a plurality of cells,
transmissions from a plurality of transmission/reception points (TRPs),
or transmissions corresponding to a plurality of beams,
wherein the machine-learning model determines one or more spatial properties of the UE based on the CIR report. (YERRAMALLI; FIG. 1-10; Background, Summary, ¶ [0060]-[0072], [0086]-[0100]; CIR related messages, neural network related measurements.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of YERRAMALLI to measure transmission related data for the reasons of employing a neural network to determine values and data related to a reference signal. (YERRAMALLI Abstract)
Claim(s) 40-42, 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of Rupasinghe et al. (US 2022/0131586 A1).
Re Claim 40 & 50, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the configuration message comprises a parameter value for a report quantity parameter, the report quantity parameter comprising at least one of: a number of beams; a number of frequency domain basis; or a length of frequency domain basis.
However, in analogous art, YERRAMALLI teaches wherein the configuration message comprises a parameter value for a report quantity parameter, the report quantity parameter comprising at least one of: (Rupasinghe; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0037], [0043]-[0066]; Configuration related data.)
a number of beams; (Rupasinghe; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0037], [0043]-[0066]; Beam numbers.)
a number of frequency domain basis; (Rupasinghe; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0037], [0043]-[0066]; Frequency domain.)
or
a length of frequency domain basis
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Rupasinghe to detail configuration data for the reasons of calculating beam number values. (Rupasinghe Abstract)
Re Claim 41, Mueck-Rupasinghe discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the CIR report comprises at least one of:
one or more indices for a plurality channel measurement resources (CMRs);
the number of beams;
the number of frequency domain basis; (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Frequency domain.)
or
the length of frequency domain basis. (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Frequency domain.)
Re Claim 42, Mueck-Rupasinghe discloses the method of claim 6, further comprising:
selecting the number of frequency domain basis with a strongest power. (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Frequency domain selection.)
Claim(s) 43, 51 & 53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of PARK et al. (US 2019/0109626 A1).
Re Claim 43 & 51, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the indication of the capability of reporting the CIR report comprises at least one of: a maximum number of channel state information (CSI) reports configurable as CIR reports; a maximum number of channel measurement resources (CMRs) for each CIR report or across multiple CIR reports; a maximum number of reported CIRs for each CIR report; a maximum number of CMRs configured for CIR report within a slot; or a time domain reporting behavior comprising at least one of aperiodic, semi- persistent, or periodic reporting.
However, in analogous art, Park teaches wherein the indication of the capability of reporting the CIR report comprises at least one of: (Park; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0204]-[0280]; CIR related messages.)
a maximum number of channel state information (CSI) reports configurable as CIR reports; : (Park; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0120]-[0185], [0302]-[0359]; CSI channel state information.)
a maximum number of channel measurement resources (CMRs) for each CIR report or across multiple CIR reports;
a maximum number of reported CIRs for each CIR report;
a maximum number of CMRs configured for CIR report within a slot;
or
a time domain reporting behavior comprising at least one of aperiodic, semi- persistent, or periodic reporting.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Park to report CIR related data for the reasons of reporting channel state information. (Park Abstract)
Re Claim 53, Mueck discloses the method of claim 14, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein receiving the CIR report comprises: transmitting a triggering message to the UE; and receiving the CIR report comprising aperiodic CIR reporting or semi-persistent CIR reporting.
However, in analogous art, Park teaches wherein receiving the CIR report comprises:
transmitting a triggering message to the UE; and (Park; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0204]-[0280]; Data transmission.)
receiving the CIR report comprising aperiodic CIR reporting or semi-persistent CIR reporting. (Park; FIG. 1; ¶ [0207]-[0307]; CIR semi persistent/aperiodic reporting.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Park to report CIR related data for the reasons of reporting channel state information. (Park Abstract)
Claim(s) 44 & 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of Kung et al. (US 2020/0322023 A1).
Re Claim 44 & 52, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, yet does not explicitly wherein the configuration message configures the UE to generate a beam quality report and the method further comprises; receiving a trigger for generating the beam quality report; performing beam quality measurements based on the trigger; and transmitting, to the network entity, the beam quality measurements with the CIR report.
However, in analogous art, Kung teaches wherein the configuration message configures the UE to generate a beam quality report and the method further comprises;
receiving a trigger for generating the beam quality report; (Kung; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0040]-[0161]; Beam reporting.)
performing beam quality measurements based on the trigger; and (Kung; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0040]-[0161]; State related (quality) beam reporting. In addition, CSI related measuring.)
transmitting, to the network entity, the beam quality measurements with the CIR report. (Kung; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0040]-[0161]; Transmitting beam report and measured data values.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Kung to transmit beam reports for the reasons of determine beam associated data signals. (Kung Background & Summary)
Claim(s) 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of Lorca Hernando (US 2015/0189644 A1).
Re Claim 45, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, yet does not explicitly further comprising at least one of: configuring, based on the configuration message, periodic CIR reporting at UE; configuring, based on the configuration message, aperiodic CIR reporting at UE; or configuring, based on the configuration message, semi-persistent CIR reporting at UE, wherein transmitting the CIR report comprises: transmitting the CIR report based on a triggering message that triggers CIR reporting at the UE, wherein the CIR reporting comprises aperiodic CIR reporting or semi- persistent CIR reporting.
However, in analogous art, Lorca Hernando teaches further comprising at least one of:
configuring, based on the configuration message, periodic CIR reporting at UE; (Lorca Hernando; FIG. 1; ¶ [0011]-[0029], [0058]-[0083], Summary; Periodic CIR relating reporting.)
configuring, based on the configuration message, aperiodic CIR reporting at UE; or
configuring, based on the configuration message, semi-persistent CIR reporting at UE, wherein transmitting the CIR report comprises:
transmitting the CIR report based on a triggering message that triggers CIR reporting at the UE, wherein the CIR reporting comprises aperiodic CIR reporting or semi- persistent CIR reporting.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of Lorca Hernando to transmit messages for the reasons of reporting channel impulse responses and channel state information. (Lorca Hernando Abstract)
Claim(s) 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1) and further in view of BEHBOODI et al. (US 2022/0070822 A1).
Re Claim 46, Mueck discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
detecting, by the UE, a plurality of downlink reference signals that are transmitted from a plurality of signal sources; (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Downlink signals.)
for each of the plurality of downlink reference signals: (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; Downlink signals.)
deriving, based on the configuration message, a respective quantized CIR value or respective beam quality information; (Mueck; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0076]-[0079], [0088]-[0146]; CIR quantization, measuring quantized values.)
Mueck does not explicitly suggest processing, by a machine-learning model, (i) the respective quantized CIR value for one or more of the plurality of downlink reference signals and (ii) the respective beam quality information one or more of the plurality of downlink reference signals; and in response to processing, predicting, by the machine-learning model, spatial properties that are indicative of a location of the UE.
However, in analogous art, BEHBOODI teaches processing, by a machine-learning model, (BEHBOODI; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0035]-[0042]; Machine learning model.)
(i) the respective quantized CIR value for one or more of the plurality of downlink reference signals and (BEHBOODI; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0035]-[0042], [0054]-[0072]; Downlink signals.)
(ii) the respective beam quality information one or more of the plurality of downlink reference signals; and (BEHBOODI; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0035]-[0042], [0054]-[0072]; Channel related data such as RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ & CQI and downlink related signal data.)
in response to processing, predicting, by the machine-learning model, spatial properties that are indicative of a location of the UE. (BEHBOODI; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0035]-[0042], [0054]-[0072]; A machine learning models used to estimate data related to spatial data.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck in view of BEHBOODI to include a machine learning model to process data for the reasons of training a neural network employing location and signal data. (BEHBOODI Abstract)
Claim(s) 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 2011/0078453 A1), in view of BEHBOODI et al. (US 2022/0070822 A1) and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2019/0306924 A1).
Re Claim 47, Mueck-BEHBOODI discloses the method of claim 12, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein: the plurality of signal sources comprises one or more of: a cell, a TRP, or an antenna; wherein each respective beam quality information comprises one or more of: layer 1 reference signal receiving power (L1-RSRP) or layer 1 signal-to-interference plus noise ratio (L1-SINR); and wherein a respective quantized CIR value and a respective beam quality information are derived for the same downlink reference signal.
However, in analogous art, Zhang teaches wherein:
the plurality of signal sources comprises one or more of: (Zhang; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0056]-[0062]; Signal sources.)
a cell, (Zhang; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0056]-[0062]; A cell.)
a TRP, (Zhang; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0056]-[0062]; ATRP.)
or
an antenna;
wherein each respective beam quality information comprises one or more of: (Zhang; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0158]-[0176]; Beam quality data.)
layer 1 reference signal receiving power (L1-RSRP) or layer 1 signal-to-interference plus noise ratio (L1-SINR); and (Zhang; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0158]-[0196]; L1-RSRP.)
wherein a respective quantized CIR value and a respective beam quality information are derived for the same downlink reference signal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Mueck-BEHBOODI in view of Zhang to include various signal sources for the reasons of decoding and transmitting beam related signal data. (Zhang Abstract)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
