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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 USC 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a)/1st ¶:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd ¶:
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.
Claim(s) 21-34 and 39-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd ¶ as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regard as the invention.
With regard to claim 21, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for the claim term(s): "UWB-compatible" and "GNSS-compatible". Claims 22-27 depend upon claim 21.
With regard to claim 28, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for the claim term(s): "UWB track database" and "GPS track database". Claims 29-34 depend upon claim 28.
With regard to claims 39-40, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for the claim term(s): "one or more track databases".
37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) requires that the “claim or claims must conform to the invention as set forth in the remainder of the specification and the terms and phrases used in the claims must find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description.” (emphasis added).
According to MPEP 608.01(o): "The use of a confusing variety of terms for the same thing should not be permitted. ... [Applicant] should make appropriate amendment of the specification whenever [application] nomenclature is departed from by amendment of the claims so as to have clear support or antecedent basis in the specification for the new terms appearing in the claims.".
Simply paraphrasing the claim in the specification, without relating the language in the claim with the rest of the disclosure, would be insufficient. This would not make the meaning of the terms in the claims any more ascertainable than they are using the claim language, alone.
“We note that the patent drafter is in the best position to resolve the ambiguity in the patent claims, and it is highly desirable that patent examiners demand that applicants do so in appropriate circumstances so that the patent can be amended during prosecution rather than attempting to resolve the ambiguity in litigation.”, Halliburton Energy Services Inc. v. M-I LLC., 85 USPQ2d 1654 at 1663.
Claim(s) 21-34 and 39-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)/1st, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. This is a new matter rejection.
With regard to claim 21, it is unclear where there is support for information that is UWB-compatible and information that is GNSS-compatible in the disclosure of the parent application. Claims 22-27 depend upon claim 21.
With regard to claim 28, it is unclear where there is support for a UWB track database and a GPS track database in the disclosure of the parent application. Claims 29-34 depend upon claim 28.
With regard to claims 39-40, it is unclear where there is support for more than one track database in the disclosure of the parent application. While ¶67 of the parent application may provide support for a track database "a representation of the geometry of a train track may be stored in memory as and/or including a data structure linking positions along the train track to corresponding geographic positions", there is no reference to multiple track databases.
As pointed out above, in complying with rule 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), applicant should be using language already in the specification, or amending the specification (without introducing new matter) to match the new language in the claim. This would help applicant identify what the specification does and does not support, as well as help the examiner identify where the disclosure supporting any new language is located.
“Entitlement to a filing date does not extend to subject matter which is not disclosed, but would be obvious over what is expressly disclosed. It extends only to that which is disclosed. While the meaning of terms, phrases, or diagrams in a disclosure is to be explained or interpreted from the vantage point of one skilled in the art, all the limitations must appear in the specification. The question is not whether a claimed invention is an obvious variant of that which is disclosed in the specification. Rather, [the disclosure] must describe an invention, and do so in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can clearly conclude that the inventor invented the claimed invention as of the filing date sought. ... the specification must contain an equivalent description of the claimed subject matter. A description which renders obvious the [claimed] invention ... is not sufficient.” -- Lockwood v. American Airlines Inc., 41 USPQ2d 1961 at 1966.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 35-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjurström (US 2021/0070335 A1) in view of Whittemore (US 2021/0046961 A1) and Needham (US 2003/0164796 A1).
In regard to claim 35, Bjurström discloses a system for determining a position of a train traveling along a train track (1, Fig. 2; Fig. 3; ¶50), the system comprising:
a plurality of positioning devices onboard and facing externally from the train (51a, 51b, Fig. 3; ¶65), the plurality of positioning devices comprising:
a plurality of directional antennas (51a, 51b, Fig. 3; directional beam from antennas in Fig. 4-5; ¶65) configured to perform communications with a plurality of anchor nodes (11, 12, Fig. 2) positioned proximate the train track at least in part by:
transmitting first signals to the plurality of anchor nodes; and receiving second signals transmitted by the plurality of anchor nodes in response to at least some of the first signals (¶73),
a global navigational satellite system (GNSS) antenna positioned on an external face of the train and configured to receive GNSS signals from one or more satellites and/or constellations (¶60) [where it is inherent for a GNSS receiver to include an antenna to receiver the GNSS signals, and well known for a GNSS antenna to be on the exterior] or an optical sensor onboard and facing externally from the train (camera, ¶82); and
processing circuitry coupled to each of the plurality of positioning devices (23, Fig. 1) and configured to:
determine range data indicating distances between the plurality of directional antennas and the plurality of anchor nodes based on arrival times of the second signals at the plurality of directional antennas (¶74-76);
determine GNSS data indicating ranges from the GNSS antenna to the one or more satellites based on arrival times of the GNSS signals at the GNSS antenna (¶60) [where what is described is the well known operation of a GNSS receiver] or determining optical data indicating characteristics of light received via the optical sensor (¶82) [where a camera image indicates characteristics of light received via the camera];
determine, using the range data and the GNSS data or the optical data, motion characteristics of the train (¶81-82)[;
where the positioning system may be implemented using any of a number of communication protocols (¶34; ¶45)].
Bjurström fails to disclose the communication protocol being ultra-wideband (UWB) from positioning-dedicated UWB antennas; wherein the first and second signals are first and second UWB signals having bandwidth of at least 400 megahertz (MHz); and both a GNSS antenna determining GNSS data and an optical sensor determining optical data.
Whittemore teaches a known train positioning-dedicated system (130 aboard a train, anchor device 160, Fig. 2; Fig. 13; ¶124; ¶146) using a UWB communication protocol (¶4); wherein the first and second signals are first and second UWB signals having bandwidth of at least 400 megahertz (MHz) (¶5-6).
Replacing one of the communication protocols of Bjurström with the UWB communication protocol of Whittemore is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to perform the same function and obtain predictable results. Because both elements are known communication protocols, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute one for the other to achieve the predictable result of wirelessly communicating.
Needham teaches determining position information using multiple positioning systems/methods, and selecting the position information with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the accuracy of the motion characteristics by selecting the best positioning method at the current time/based on the current conditions.
Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being that the accuracy of the motion characteristics is increased by using multiple positioning methods in order to select the best positioning method at the current time/based on the current conditions.
In the combination, both the GNSS antenna determining GNSS data and the optical sensor determining optical data would be used, and the determined position information that has the lowest uncertainty would be selected for use in determining the motion characteristics of the train.
In regard to claim 36, Bjurström further discloses the motion characteristics comprise a position (¶81), velocity (speed plus direction, ¶81), track (¶82), and/or direction of travel of the train (¶81).
In regard to claim 37, Bjurström further discloses the motion characteristics comprise each of a position (¶81), velocity (speed plus direction, ¶81), track (¶82), and direction of travel of the train (¶81).
In regard to claim 38, Bjurström further discloses providing the motion characteristics of the train to a[n internal] train control system (¶81). Whittemore further teaches providing the motion characteristics of the train to a[n external] train control system (¶124, final sentence; ¶141, final sentence).
Claim(s) 39-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjurström, Whittemore, and Needham, as applied to claim 39, and further in view of Batchelor '504 (US 2022/0024504 A1).
In regard to claim 39, Bjurström further discloses determining the motion characteristics of the train further using the known fixed path of the railway track (¶23; ¶72).
Bjurström fails to disclose [how the known fixed path of the railway track is implemented, including] using one or more track databases comprising track positions.
Batchelor '504 teaches determining the fixed path of the railway track is known using one or more track databases comprising track positions (¶16-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to implement using the known fixed path of the railway track to determine the motion characteristics of the train.
Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being that the fixed path of the railway track is known.
In regard to claim 40, Bjurström further discloses using the range data and the GNSS data to determine motion characteristics (¶73-76; ¶81-82).
Needham further teaches determining respective first and second positions, and selecting the one of the first and second positions with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36) [where when two positioning system/methods are available to a system, one of the first or second positions will be selected].
In the combination, a first position based on the UWB ranging data and a second position based on the GNSS data would be used to select an estimated position of the train, where each position would be based on the one or more track databases is used to limit the position of the train (as taught by Batchelor '504), and determining the motion characteristics include the selected one of the first and second positions.
Claim(s) 21-25 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjurström in view of Whittemore, Batchelor '504, and Needham.
In regard to claim 21, Bjurström discloses a system for determining a position of a train traveling along a train track (1, Fig. 2; Fig. 3; ¶50), the system comprising:
a plurality of directional antennas onboard and facing externally from the train (51a, 51b, Fig. 3; ¶65) and configured to perform communications with a plurality of anchor nodes positioned proximate the train track (1 communicating with 11 and 12, Fig. 2) at least in part by:
transmitting first signals to the plurality of anchor nodes; and receiving second signals transmitted by the plurality of anchor nodes in response to at least some of the first signals (¶73),
a global navigational satellite system (GNSS) antenna positioned on an external face of the train and configured to receive GNSS signals from one or more satellites and/or constellations (¶60) [where it is inherent for a GNSS receiver to include an antenna to receiver the GNSS signals, and well known for a GNSS antenna to be on the exterior]; and
processing circuitry positioned onboard the train (23, Fig. 1) and configured to perform:
determining range data indicating distances between the plurality of directional antennas and the plurality of anchor nodes based on arrival times of the second signals at the plurality of directional antennas (¶74-76);
determine, using the range data and known locations of the plurality of anchor nodes, a first observed position of the train that is consistent with the range data/UWB-consistent (¶23; ¶72) [i.e. consistent with the UWB range data];
determining GNSS data indicating ranges from the GNSS antenna to the one or more satellites based on arrival times of the GNSS signals at the GNSS antenna (¶60) [where what is described is the well known operation of a GNSS receiver];
providing an estimated position of the train in the reference frame to a train control system (¶81)[;
where the positioning system may be implemented using any of a number of communication protocols (¶34; ¶45)].
Bjurström fails to disclose the communication protocol being ultra-wideband (UWB); using information specifying a geometry of the train track in a reference frame in the determination of the first observed position by selecting a first position along the train track that is specified in the information; determining, using the GNSS data and information specifying the geometry of the train track in the reference frame, a second observed position of the train along the train track at least in part by selecting a second position along the train track that is specified in the information and is consistent with the GNSS data; and determining, using the first observed position and the second observed position, an estimated position of the train in the reference frame; and GNSS processing circuitry separate from the range processing circuitry.
Whittemore teaches a known train positioning system (130 aboard a train, anchor device 160, Fig. 2; Fig. 13; ¶124; ¶146) using a UWB communication protocol (¶4).
Replacing one of the communication protocols of Bjurström with the UWB communication protocol of Whittemore is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to perform the same function and obtain predictable results. Because both elements are known communication protocols, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute one for the other to achieve the predictable result of wirelessly communicating.
Bjurström further discloses determining the motion characteristics of the train further using the known fixed path of the railway track (¶23; ¶72).
Batchelor '504 teaches determining the fixed path of the railway track is known using information specifying a geometry of the train track in a reference frame in the determination of an observed position by selecting a position along the train track that is specified in the information (¶16-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to implement using the known fixed path of the railway track to determine the motion characteristics of the train.
Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being that the fixed path of the railway track is known.
Needham teaches determining position information using multiple positioning systems/methods, and selecting the position information with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the accuracy of the motion characteristics by selecting the best positioning method at the current time/based on the current conditions.
Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being that the accuracy of the motion characteristics is increased by using multiple positioning methods in order to select the best positioning method at the current time/based on the current conditions.
In the combination, a first observed position based on the UWB ranging data and a second observed position based on the GNSS data would be used to select an estimated position of the train in the reference frame, where each position would be based on the geometry of the tracks (as taught by Batchelor '504), where a position determined from UWB ranges is UWB-compatible and a position determined from GNSS ranges is GNSS-compatible, and the ranges are consistent with GNSS range data.
The Office takes Official Notice that one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it well known before the effective filing date of the invention for a GNSS receiver to have a dedicated GNSS processor for performing the GNSS position-related processing (e.g., Watters (US 5,982,324 A), Fig. 10 and col. 20, lines 14-33).
In regard to claim 22, Needham further teaches determining the estimated position in the reference frame by selecting one of the first observed position and the second observed position as the estimated position of the train in the reference frame (¶30-36) [where in the combination the thing being positioned is the train].
In regard to claim 23, Bjurström further discloses selecting the first observed position while the train is in a tunnel (¶5; ¶65).
In the combination, when the second observed position has lower uncertainty/error while the train is outdoors (as taught by Needham), the second observed position is selected.
In regard to claim 24, Batchelor '504 further teaches executing a first state tracker; inputting the first observed position to the first state tracker; determining the estimated position of the train as an output from the first state tracker (45, Fig. 5) [where the Kalman filter is the state tracker; and where a Kalman filter uses the determined state vector to produce an updated state vector, where in the combination, the current state vector includes the first observed position and the update state vector includes the outputted position].
Needham has taught determining position information using multiple positioning systems/methods, and selecting the position information with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36).
Thus, in the combination, there would be a second state tracker for the second GNSS mode of positioning, which will provide a second output position, which would be compared with the first output position to determine/select the estimated position of the train.
In regard to claim 25, Bjurström further discloses determining the range data at least in part by determining time-of-flight information of the signals based at least in part on the arrival times of the second signals at the plurality of directional antennas (¶73-76); and
determining, using the range data, the known locations of the plurality of anchor nodes, the first observed position of the train along the train track at least in part by selecting the first position of the train that is consistent with the range data (¶72-76); and
determining the GNSS data based at least in part on the arrival times of the GNSS signals at the GNSS antenna (¶60) [where what is described is the well known operation of a GNSS receiver].
Batchelor '504 further teaches determining the fixed path of the railway track is known using information specifying a geometry of the train track in a reference frame in the determination of an observed position by selecting a position along the train track that is specified in the information (¶16-19).
Needham further teaches determining position information using multiple positioning systems/methods, and selecting the position information with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36).In the combination, a first observed position based on the UWB ranging data and a second observed position based on the GNSS data would be used to select an estimated position of the train in the reference frame, where each position would be based on the geometry of the tracks (as taught by Batchelor '504). In the combination, the signals between the train antennas and the anchor antenna are UWB signals.
In regard to claim 27, Bjurström further discloses:
determining a velocity (speed plus direction, ¶81), track (¶82), and direction of travel of the train (¶81), the determining, using the range data and the known locations of the plurality of anchor nodes (¶23; ¶72);
determine, using the GNSS data (¶60).
Batchelor '504 further teaches determining the fixed path of the railway track is known using information specifying a geometry of the train track in a reference frame in the determination of an observed position by selecting a position along the train track that is specified in the information (¶16-19).
Needham further teaches determining position information using multiple positioning systems/methods, and selecting the position information with the lowest uncertainty/error (¶30-36).
In the combination, the signals between the train antennas and the anchor antenna are UWB signals; each position determined by each processor would be based on the geometry of the train track in a reference frame to limit the position of the train (as taught by Batchelor '504); and a second velocity, track, and direction of travel of the train along the train track will be calculated using the GNSS data, and a final velocity, track, and direction of travel of the train will be selected from one of the first velocity, track, and direction of travel and the second velocity, track, and direction of travel.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bjurström, Whittemore, Batchelor '504, and Needham, as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Arashin (US 2019/0023293 A1).
Bjurström further discloses the [second] plurality of directional antennas comprises a first directional antenna positioned at a first end of a first train car of the train (51a, 51b, Fig. 3) and configured to transmit the first signals to the plurality of anchors and receive the second signals from the plurality of anchors in response to the first signals (Fig. 2; ¶73-76).
In the combination, the signals between the train antennas and the anchor antenna are UWB signals.
The combination fails to teach the particular antenna configuration claimed, where the system further comprises a second directional UWB antenna positioned at a second end of the first train car that is opposite to the first end and faces a second train car of the train, the second directional UWB antenna configured to communicate data with a third directional UWB antenna positioned at a third end of the second train car that faces the second end of the first train car.
Arashin teaches the system further comprises a second directional antenna positioned at a second end of the first train car that is opposite to the first end and faces a second train car of the train, the second directional antenna configured to communicate data with a third directional antenna positioned at a third end of the second train car that faces the second end of the first train car (Fig. 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 10, and 11; ¶29).
In the combination, the communication signals are UWB signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide access to the communication signals to passengers in interior cars of the train
Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being passengers in interior cars of the train can access the communication signals.
The following reference(s) is/are also found relevant:
Watters (US 5,982,324 A), which teaches separate processors for GNSS and non-GNSS positioning (Fig. 10; col. 20, lines 14-33).
Hanczor (US 2021/0070332 A1), which teaches an existing UWB data communications system that can also be used for precision ranging (¶50).
Peng (US 2022/0357464 A1), which teaches determining the uncertainty of a UWB derived position (¶78).
Maybeck (Stochastic models, estimation, and control), which teaches a Kalman filter is a state tracker that uses the current state in order to determine the next state (p. 12, equation 1-7) [where the state at time t1 is used in determining the state at time t2].
Sommer (EP 2093122 A1), which teaches an antenna configuration allowing communication between train cars (Fig. 5-8).
Lazarescu (Asynchronous Resilient Wireless Sensor Network for Train Integrity Monitoring), which teaches an antenna configuration allowing communication between train cars (Fig. 4-5).
Danel (How Bluetooth 5.1, UWB, and Wi-Fi 802.11az Empower the Next Frontier of Micro-Location), which teaches the details of UWB positioning and other positioning methods.
Spinsante (Hybridized-GNSS Approaches to Train Positioning: Challenges and Open Issues on Uncertainty), which teaches using directional antennas/beamforming to improve the vertical positioning (p. 5, bullet 3).
Carlson '235 (US 2020/0317235 A1), which teaches positioning a train using an arrival time to determine at least one distance from at least one position of at least one anchor node using UWB signals (¶16; ¶24; ¶28; ¶57-58) and determining the position, velocity (speed plus direction), and direction of the train and track that the train is located on (¶20).
Heirich (Measurement Methods for Train Localization with Onboard Sensors), which teaches different methods of using a time of arrival in train positioning, includes TOA, TDOA, and RTD [round-trip delay time] (section 3.2.4), as well as the use of an IMU (section 3.2.2).
Applicant is encouraged to consider these documents in formulating their response (if one is required) to this Office Action, in order to expedite prosecution of this application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 28-34 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 USC 112, set forth in this Office Action, without the addition of new matter.
Reasons for Allowance/Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance/allowable subject matter:
The references cited, alone or in combination, do not teach or make obvious the following limitation(s):
quoted from claim 28, in combination with the claim as a whole:
" using a GPS track database separate from the UWB track database that comprises track positions corresponding to the GPS data".
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance".
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments on p. 15, with respect to the objection(s), have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection(s) have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments on p. 15-22, with respect to the prior art rejection(s) of claims 28-34 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection(s) of these claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments on p. 15-22, with respect to the prior art rejection(s) of claims 21-27 and 35-40 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Bjurström purpose is to reuse existing data communications equipment for additional positioning functionality. However, Bjurström merely states the positioning scheme "can" be implemented in such a manner, not that it must be implemented in such a manner (¶14).
Whittemore teaches worker safety equipment that exists before the effective filing date of the invention that involves communicating data (¶3; ¶130; ¶141).
Also note that Hanczor (US 2021/0070332 A1) teaches an existing UWB data communications system that can also be used for precision ranging (¶50).
Applicant's arguments about the cost of the combination are unconvincing. According to Orthopedic Equipment Company, Inc. et al. v. United States, 217 USPQ 193 at 200: “the fact that the two disclosed apparatus would not be combined by businessmen for economic reasons is not the same as saying that it could not be done because skilled persons in the art felt that there was some technological incompatibility that prevented this combination. Only the latter fact is telling on[] the issue of nonobviousness.". According to In re Farrenkopf, 219 USPQ 1 at 4: “That a given combination would not be made by businessmen for economic reasons does not mean that persons skilled in the art would not make the combination because of some technological incompatibility. Only the latter fact would be relevant.”. See also MPEP 2145 VII.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fred H. Mull whose telephone number is 571-272-6975. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from approximately 9-5:30 Eastern Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 https://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached at 571-272-2097. 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.
Fred H. Mull
Examiner
Art Unit 3645
/F. H. M./
Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645