www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/909,664
`
`06/23/2020
`
`LILEI WANG
`
`731456.468C1
`
`9286
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`KAVLESKIRYAN C
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2412
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/29/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-9 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)(] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 6/23/2020 is/are: a)(¥) accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)Z) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)X) All
`1.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`6/23/2020,11/9/2020,1/25/2021.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210917
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/909,664
`WANG etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`RYAN C KAVLESKI
`2412
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 6/23/2020.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 2
`
`In response to communication filed on 6/23/2020.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Claims 1-9 are pending.
`
`Claims 1-9 are rejected.
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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 statements (IDS) submitted on 6/23/2020, 11/9/2020, and
`
`1/25/2021 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure
`
`statements are being considered by the examiner.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitation “a
`
`configuration of reference signal” which should be corrected to recite “a configuration of a reference
`
`signal.” Appropriate correction is required.
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 3
`
`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 underthe first inventor tofile
`
`provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146et 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 USPTOInternet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Pleasevisit
`
`www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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 maybefilled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal
`
`Disclaimer that meetsall requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission.
`
`For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to
`
`www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 4
`
`Claims 1-7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as
`
`being unpatentable over claims 8-13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385. Althoughthe conflicting claims
`
`are notidentical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
`
`Current Application
`1. A user equipment comprising:
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385
`13. A user equipment (UE) comprising:
`
`
`
`a receiver, which, in operation, receives a bitmap|areceiver operativetoreceive a bitmap
`indicating a candidate of transmission time
`indicating candidate transmission time interval(s)
`interval (TTI), which is one or more symbols used|(TTI{s)) froma plurality of TTls for a physical
`for a physical channel among 14 symbols; and
`channel in a subframe in a radio resource control
`(RRC) or a medium access control (MAC)layer;
`and circuitry operative to determine the
`candidate TTI(s) based on the bitmap,
`circuitry, which, in operation, blindly decodes the|wherein the receiver is operative to receive the
`physical channel in the candidate based on the
`physical channel in one or more of the candidate
`bitmap.
`TTl{(s) by blindly decoding the candidate TTI(s),
`and each of the plurality of TTls in the subframe
`includes 1-7 orthogonal frequency division
`multiplexing (OFDM) symbols, each of the
`plurality of TTls in the subframe have a first
`length, a size of the bitmap depends on the first
`length, and in a case where the size of the bit
`map is not divisible by the first length, at least
`two TTls in the subframe are arranged to overlap
`each other, or some OFDM symbols in the
`subframe are not assigned to the plurality of TTls.
`11. The eNode B according to claim 8, wherein
`the first length is 14.
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the limitations of claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385 to omit
`
`limitations regarding how to handle TTls based upon the size of the bit map not being divisible by the
`
`first length to arrive at the claimed invention and incorporate the length of a TTI being 14 as limited by
`
`claim 11. One would be motivated to do so to provide an obvious variation that would be apparent to
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the same claimed invention of blindly decoding a channel
`
`based upon a TTI identified in a bitmap.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 5
`
`Regarding claims 2-7 of the current application, claims 8-12 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385 substantially
`
`limit the same subject matter. Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct
`
`because theyare of an obvious variation that would be apparent to one of ordinaryskill in the art.
`
`Current Application
`9, A receiving method comprising:
`receiving a bitrnap indicating a candidate of
`transmission tlme interval (TT), which is one or
`more symbols used for a physical channel among
`14 symbols; and
`
`blindly decoding the physical channel in the
`candidate based oan the bitmap.
`
`the first length is 14.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385
`
`a receiver operative to receive a bitmap
`indicating candidate transmission time interval(s)
`(TTI(s)) from a plurality of TTls for a physical
`channel in a subframe in a radio resource control
`(RRC) or a medium access control (MAC)layer;
`and circuitry operative to determine the
`candidate TTI(s) based on the bitmap,
`wherein the receiver is operative to receive the
`physical channel in one or more of the candidate
`TTl{(s) by blindly decoding the candidate TTI(s),
`and each of the plurality of TTls in the subframe
`includes 1-7 orthogonal frequency division
`multiplexing (OFDM) symbols, each of the
`plurality of TTls in the subframe havea first
`length, a size of the bitmap depends on the first
`length, and in a case where the size of the bit
`map is not divisible by the first length, at least
`two TTls in the subframe are arranged to overlap
`each other, or some OFDM symbols in the
`subframe are not assigned to the plurality of TTls.
`11. The eNode B according to claim 8, wherein
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the limitations of claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385 to omit
`
`limitations regarding how to handle TTls based upon the size of the bit map not being divisible by the
`
`first length to arrive at the claimed invention and incorporate the length of a TTI being 14 as limited by
`
`claim 11. One would be motivated to do so to provide an obvious variation that would be apparent to
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the same claimed invention of blindly decoding a channel
`
`based upon a TTI identified in a bitmap.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 6
`
`Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable
`
`over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385 in view of Lee et al. (US Pub. 2018/0376495)(L1 hereafter).
`
`Regarding claim & of the current application, claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,742,385 does not further
`
`Himnit that the candidate of the TTlis based on a configuration of reference signal,
`
`Li discloses that a terminal can be configured to support a length of a transmission time interval
`
`by receiving configuration information associated with an uplink reference signai for a plurality of TTis
`
`from a base station [refer Abstract],
`
`it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the limitations of claim 13 of US. Patent No. 10,742,385 to further limit
`
`the use of configuration information associated with a reference signal for a pturality of TTis as taught by
`
`Li. One would be motivated ta do $0 ta provide support for multiple TT lengths in a wireless
`
`communication system [refer Li: paragraph 0005],
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102
`
`and 103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
`
`basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground ofrejection if the prior art relied upon, and
`
`the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under eitherstatus.
`
`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 may not be obtained thoughthe invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in
`section 102 ofthis title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art
`are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
`person having ordinaryskill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be
`negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 7
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966),
`
`that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are
`
`summarized as follows:
`
`PwNhP
`
`Determining the scope and contentsof the prior art.
`Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousnessor
`nonobviousness.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumesthat the subject matter of the various claims was commonly ownedas of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised
`
`of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effectivefiling dates of each claim that
`
`was not commonly ownedas of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner
`
`to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art
`
`against the later invention.
`
`Claims 1,5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelletier et al.
`
`(US Pub. 2018/0123769)(P1 hereafter) in view of Patneleevet al. (US Pub. 2017/0208616){P2
`
`hereafter).
`
`Regarding claims 1 and 9, P1 teaches a user equipment(i.e. wireless transmit receive unit WTRU)[refer
`
`Fig. 1B; 102] comprising:
`
`a receiver [refer Fig. 1B; 120], which, in operation, receives a bitmap indicating a candidate of
`
`transmission time interval (TTI) (the WTRU receives a DCI that includes scheduling information, such as a
`
`list of applicable cells and TTls using a bitmap for group of cells)[paragraph 0122]; and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 8
`
`circuitry, which, in operation, blindly decodes the physical channel in the candidate(i.e. TTI)
`
`based on the bitmap (the TTls can help for blind decoding reduction [paragraph 0078], the information
`
`is used to influence blind decoding for transmissions [paragraph 0080)).
`
`HoweverP11 fails to disclose the candidate TTI which is one or more symbols used for a physical
`
`channel among 14 symbols.
`
`S1 discloses that a unit of time for a subframe is defined as a TTI, the subframe being a length of
`
`at least 2 slots and one slot can include a plurality of OFDM symbols in the time domain [paragraph
`
`0051], one slog can include 7 OFDM symbols when cyclic prefixes are applied [paragraph 0052].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 to explicitly define TTIs as being comprised of OFDM
`
`symbols as taught by $1.
`
`In doing so, the number of OFDM symbols can comprise of at least 14 symbols
`
`when at the least two slots comprise of 7 OFDM symbols each[refer $1; paragraphs 0051-0052]. One
`
`would be motivated to do so to provide the use of prior art elements to known proceduresto yield
`
`predictable results.
`
`Regarding claim 5, P1 teaches the receiver, in operation, receives the bitmap in a radio resource control
`
`(RRC) or a medium access control (MAC)(in relation to the sending of the DCI, higher layers, such as
`
`RRC, are used to configurecells)[paragraph 0068].
`
`Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P1 in view of $1, as
`
`applied to claim 1, in further view of Patneleev et al. (US Pub. 2017/0208616)({P2 hereafter).
`
`Regarding claim 2, P1 fails to disclose a length of the TTI is variable, and a size of the bitmap is constant
`
`for all of different lengths of the TTI.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 9
`
`P2 discloses that a number of TTIs in a cycle can be a multiple of the length, in TTls, of a bitmap
`
`[paragraph 0062], SA control messages that include bitmaps which are used as time resource pattern for
`
`transmission (T-RPT) generation parameters [paragraph 0068], the T-RPT is based upon a numberof
`
`consecutive TTls in a group, such as a TTI length indicator (i.e. length of the TTI is variable) and based on
`
`a numberof TTls [paragraph 0069].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 for providing a bitmap for identifying TTls for blind
`
`decoding reduction to allow for expanded bitmaps that are based upon the numberof TTls as taught by
`
`P2. One would be motivated to do so to provide a better indication of TTls for a UE for transmission
`
`[refer P2; paragraph 0055].
`
`Regarding claim 3, P1 fails to disclose a size of the bitmap is equal to the largest one of numbers of the
`
`candidate configurable in the 14 symbols.
`
`P2 discloses that a number of TTIs in a cycle can be a multiple of the length, in TTls, of a bitmap
`
`[paragraph 0062], this bitmap is conveyed via RRC messages transmitted by the eNB to a user
`
`equipment (UE) to identify TTls to the UE [paragraph 0075], an expanded bitmap can havebit positions
`
`that indicate exclusion of a TTI mapped to a bit position [paragraph 0080].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 for providing a bitmap for identifying TTls for blind
`
`decoding reduction to allow for expanded bitmaps that are based upon the number of TTls as taught by
`
`P2. One would be motivated to do so to provide a better indication of TTls for a UE for transmission
`
`[refer P2; paragraph 0055].
`
`Regarding claim 4, P1 fails to disclose a size of the bitmap is 14 bits.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 10
`
`P2 discloses that a number of TTIs in a cycle can be a multiple of the length, in TTls, of a bitmap
`
`[paragraph 0062], this bitmap is conveyed via RRC messages transmitted by the eNB to a user
`
`equipment (UE) to identify TTls to the UE [paragraph 0075], an expanded bitmap can havebit positions
`
`that indicate exclusion of a TTI mapped to a bit position [paragraph 0080]. P2 discloses that bitmaps can
`
`comprise of varying number of bits based upon the pattern of TTls and noted examples are notlimited
`
`[paragraph 0058][refer Fig. 7][refer Fig. 10].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 for providing a bitmap for identifying TTls for blind
`
`decoding reduction to allow for expanded bitmaps that are based upon the number of TTls as taught by
`
`P2.
`
`In doing so, a bitmap size can be up to 14 bits by design choice to identify a number of TTls the
`
`varying number of TTls. One would be motivated to do so to provide a better indication of TTls for a UE
`
`for transmission [refer P2; paragraph 0055].
`
`Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P1 in view of S1,
`
`as applied to claim 1, in further view of Ranta-Ahoetal. (US Pub. 2015/0016431){R1 hereafter).
`
`Regarding claim 6, P11 fails to disclose a length of the TTI is specific to the user equipment.
`
`R1 discloses that UEs are notified of which TTI length to use, in which UE’s can have an initial
`
`preference to a specific TTI length [paragraph 0087].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 to allow for varying TTI lengths based upon
`
`capabilities (i.e. UE specific) of the UE as taught by R1. One would be motivated to do so to provide
`
`efficiency and backwards compatibility [refer R1; paragraph 0087].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 11
`
`Regarding claim 7, P1 fails to disclose a length of the TTI depends on coverage of the user equipment.
`
`R1 discloses that two different TTI values can be allocatedin a cell so that legacy UEs can see
`
`one TTI while another release UE can see both [paragraph 0086], UEs are notified of which TTI length to
`
`use, in which UE’s can have an initial preference to a specific TTI length [paragraph 0087].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of P1 to allow for varying TTI lengths based upon
`
`capabilities (i.e. UE specific) of the UE as taught by R1. One would be motivated to do so to provide
`
`efficiency and backwards compatibility [refer R1; paragraph 0087].
`
`Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P1 in view of $1, as applied
`
`to claim 1, in further view of Lee et al. (US Pub. 2018/0376495)(L1 hereafter).
`
`Regarding claim 8, P1 fails to disclose the candidate of the TTI is based on a configuration of reference
`
`signal.
`
`Li discloses that a terminal can be configured to support a length of a transmission time interval
`
`by receiving configuration information associated with an uplink reference signal for a plurality of TTis
`
`fromma base station frefer Abstract],
`
`it would have been obviaus to one of ordinary skilin the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Pi to incorporate configuration information associated
`
`with a reference signal for a plurality of TTls as taught by LL. One would be motivated te do so te
`
`provide support for rnultigie TTE lengths in a wireless communication system [refer Lt: paragraph OGOSE
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 12
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to RYAN C KAVLESKI whose telephone numberis (571)270-3619. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached on M-F 6:30am-3pm.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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,
`
`Charles C Jiang can be reached on 571-270-7191. The fax phone number for the organization wherethis
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application
`
`Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained
`
`from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available
`
`through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-
`
`direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer
`
`Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR
`
`CANADA)or 571-272-1000.
`
`Ryan Kavleski
`/R. K./
`Examiner, Art Unit 2412
`
`/JAMAL JAVAID/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/909,664
`Art Unit: 2412
`
`Page 13
`
`