www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/431,462
`
`02/13/2017
`
`LEI HUANG
`
`731156.583C1
`
`8970
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasome
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WASHINGTON 98104
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`RIVAS' SALVADOR E
`
`2479
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/26/2018
`
`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):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .Com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/431,462
`Examiner
`SALVADOR E RIVAS
`
`Applicant(s)
`HUANG, LEI
`Art Unit
`2479
`
`AIA Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from 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, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 02 July 2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—3,10 and 13—15 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s) 4—9 and 11—12 is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—3,10 and 13—15 is/are rejected.
`
`C] Claim(s) _
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible 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.'sp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10):] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 13 February 2017 is/are: a). accepted or b)C] 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)C] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:] All
`
`b)|:] Some”
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.|:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`21:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in 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_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) D Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180718
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`2.
`
`Applicant’s election of claims 1-3 and 10 in the reply filed on July 2, 2018 is
`
`acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out
`
`the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as
`
`an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01 (a)). The requirement is still deemed
`
`proper and is therefore made FINAL.
`
`Priority
`
`3.
`
`Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C.
`
`119 (a)-(d).
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`4.
`
`The information disclosure statement submitted on February 13, 2017 and
`
`October 19, 2017 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the
`
`application file.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subiect to AIA 35
`
`U. S. C. 102 and 103 (or as subiect to lQre-AIA 35 U. S. C. 102 and 1032 is incorrect, any
`
`correction of the statutory basis for the reiection will not be considered a new ground of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431 ,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 3
`
`reiection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the reiectionz would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`5.
`
`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.
`
`Claims 1, 10, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being
`
`anticipated by Wang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2013/0315325 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Wang et al. teach an MIMO training method (Fig(s).1, 7)
`
`comprising:
`
`performing transmission sector sweeping using an initiator including a plurality of
`
`transmitting antennas (Fig.1 @ 111; Paragraph [0026]);
`
`selecting a set of at least one transmission sector for each of the transmitting
`
`antennas using a responder including a plurality of receiving antennas (read as “The
`
`responder
`
`then selects one
`
`RX sector with the highest
`
`signal
`
`
`
`quality for each 0:: the selected TX sector (e.g., RX sectors 3, 6,
`
`8,
`
`
`and 15 for TX sectors 1,
`
`9, 25, and 28 respectively).”(Fig.6B;
`
`Paragraph [0041]) Further, “each sector corresponds
`
`
`to a specific TX
`
`antenna beam/pattern (e . g. , direction/weight) .” (Paragraph [0026]) Also,
`
`
` “Roth initiator 101
`
`and responder 102 are equipped with antenna
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 4
`
`arrays
`
`to
`
`support
`
`
`MIMO
`
`operation
`
`
`:or multiple
`
`spatial
`
`streams .”(Paragraph [0025]));
`
`performing reception sector sweeping using the initiator (Fig.1 @ 111; Paragraph
`
`[0026]);
`
`selecting a set of at least one reception sector for each of the plurality of receiving
`
`antennas using the responder (read as “The
`
`responder
`
`then selects one RX
`
`
`
`sec:or with the highest signal quality for each 0: the selected TX
`
`
`
`
`
`
`sec:or (e.g., RX sectors 3, 6, 8, and 15 for TX sectors L, 9, 25,
`
`and
`
`28
`
`respectively) .” (Fig.63; Paragraph [0041]) Further, "each
`
`sector
`
`corresponds
`
`to
`
`a
`
`
`speci:ic
`
`RX
`
`antenna
`
`beam/pattern
`
`(e.g.,
`
`
`direction/weight).”(Pafixflaph[0026D Abo,“30th initiator
`
`101
`
`and
`
`
`
`
`responder 102 are equipped with antenna arrays to support MIMO
`
`
`operation ‘or multiple spatial streams.%PaflKflaph[0025Dfl
`
`performing beam combination training using the initiator (Fig.7 @ 701; Paragraph
`
`[0044]); and
`
`selecting a determined number of sector pairs consisting of a transmission sector
`
`and a reception sector from among the selected set of transmission sectors and the
`
`selected set of reception sectors using the responder (read as "responder
`
`102
`
`records the received signal quality (e.g.,
`
`signal—to—noise ratio
`
`(SNR))
`
`
`and determines a number 0: beam combinations
`
`(selected TX
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431 ,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 5
`
`
`and RX sector pairs) based on the results 0: TX sector sweep and
`
`RX sector sweep.”(Paragraph [0025])),
`
`wherein the transmitting antennas in the selected sector pairs differ from one
`
`another, and the receiving antennas in the selected sector pairs differ from one another.
`
`
`
`
`
`Ueadas“"n order to find the best beam combinations for multiple
`
`spatial streams,
`
`the selection criteria needs to include the
`
`
`
`b tw n th spatial streams.
`
`
`
`mutual
`
`
`incerference or l akag
`
`
`
`
`
` A_cer considering the mutual interference or leakage,
`
`the best
`
`
`two beam combinations are finally determined. For example, TXl—
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` RX3 sector pair is selected “or a first spatial stream SS 1, and
`
`
`
`TX28—RX6 sector pair is selected for a second spatial stream
`
`
`
`
`
`SS 2 (Fig.6B; Paragraph [0042]))
`
`Regarding claim 10, Wang et al. teach a wireless device (Fig.2 @ 201) comprising:
`
`a plurality of receiving antennas (Fig.2 @ 215-218);
`
`transmission sector sweep circuitry, which in operation, selects a set of at least
`
`one transmission sector for each of the transmitting antennas in MIMO training between
`
`the wireless device and an initiator including a plurality of transmitting antennas (read as
`
`processor (Fig.2 @ 203; Fig.7 @ 701; Paragraph(s) [0028] and [0041]); For example,
`
`“The responder then selects one RX sector with the highest signal
`
`
`
`quality for each 0: the selected TX sector (e.g., RX sectors 3, 6,
`
`8,
`
`
`and 15 for TX sectors 1,
`
`9, 25, and 28 respectively)f’flqg6B;
`
`Paragraph [0041]) Further, “each sector corresponds
`
`
`to a specific TX
`
`antenna beam/pattern (e.g., direction/weight)."(Paflmflaph[0026D/MSO,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431 ,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 6
`
`
` “Roth initiator 101
`
`and responder 102 are equipped with antenna
`
`arrays
`
`to
`
`support
`
`
`MIIMO
`
`operation
`
`
`::or multiple
`
`spatial
`
`
`
`streams .”(Paragraph [0025]));
`
`reception sector sweep circuitry, which in operation, selects a set of at least one
`
`reception sector for each of the receiving antennas in the MIMO training (read as
`
`processor
`
`(Fig.2 @ 203; Paragraph(s)
`
`[0028] and [0041]); For example,
`
`"The
`
`responder
`
`then selects one RX sector with the highest
`
`signal
`
`
`
`quality for each 0:: the selected TX sector (e.g., RX sectors 3, 6,
`
`8,
`
`
`and 15 for TX sectors 1,
`
`9, 25, and 28 respectively).”(Fig.6B;
`
`Paragraph [0041]) Further, “each sector corresponds
`
`
`to a specific RX
`
`antenna beam/pattern (e . g. , direction/weight) .” (Paragraph [0026]) Also,
`
`
` “Roth initiator 101
`
`and responder 102 are equipped with antenna
`
`arrays
`
`to
`
`support
`
`
`MIIMO
`
`operation
`
`
`::or multiple
`
`spatial
`
`
`
`streams .”(Paragraph [0025])); and
`
`determination circuitry, which in operation, selects, from among the selected set of
`
`transmission sectors and the selected set of reception sectors, a determined number of
`
`sector pairs consisting of a transmission sector and a reception sector in the MIMO
`
`training (read as processor (Fig.2 @ 203; Paragraph(s) [0025, ][0028] and [0041]); For
`
`example, “responder 102 records the received signal quality (e.g. ,
`
`signal—to—noise
`
`ratio (SNR))
`
`and determines
`
`a number
`
`
`0:: beam
`
`
`
`combinations (selected TX and RX sector pairs) based on the results
`
`
`0::
`
`TX sector
`
`sweep and RX sector
`
`sweep.”(Paragraph [0025]) Further,
`
`“Processor 203 processes the received baseband signals and invokes
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`
`
`
`
`di""erent
`junctional modules
`
`device .”(Paragraph [0027])),
`
`
`
`
`per‘orm ‘eatures
`
`to
`
`in
`
`the
`
`Page 7
`
`wherein the transmitting antennas of the initiator in the selected sector pairs differ
`
`from one another, and the receiving antennas of the wireless device in the selected
`
`
`
`
`sector pairs differ from one another. (read as “"n order to "ind the best beam
`
`
`
`combinations ‘or multiple spatial streams,
`
`the selection
`
`
`
`
`criteria needs to include the mutual interference or leakage
`
`between the spatial streams. After considering the mutual
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`incerjerence or leakage,
`
`the best two beam combinations are
`
`
`‘inal'y determined. For example, TXl—RX3 sector pair is selected
`
`
`
`
`
`
`'or a
`irsc spatial stream SS 1, and TX28—RX6 sector pair is
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`selected for a second spatial stream SS 2.”GWg6B;Pa€gmmh[OO42D)
`
`Regarding claim 15, Wang et al. teach a wireless device (Fig.1; Fig.2 @ 201)
`
`comprising:
`
`a plurality of transmitting antennas (Fig.2 @ 215-218);
`
`transmission circuitry, which in operation,
`
`transmits one or more signals for
`
`transmission sector sweep, one or more signals for reception sector sweep and one or
`
`more signals for beam combination training in MIMO training between the wireless device
`
`and a responder including a plurality of receiving antennas (read as processor (Fig.2 @
`
`203; Fig.7 @ 701; Paragraph(s) [0028] and [0041]); For example, “The
`
`responder
`
`
`then selects one RX sector with the highest signal quality “or
`
`
`each 0:
`
`the selected TX sector
`
`(e.g., RX sectors 3, 6, 8, and 15
`
` for TX sectors 1, 9, 25, and 28 respectively) .” (Fig.68; Paragraph [0041])
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431 ,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 8
`
`Fudhen “each
`
`sector
`
`corresponds
`
`to
`
`a
`
`
`specific
`
`TX
`
`antenna
`
`
`beam/pattern (e.g., direction/weight).”(Pafixfiaph[0026D Abo,“30th
`
`initiator 101 and responder 102 are equipped with antenna arrays
`
`
`
`to support MEMO operation for multiple spatial streams.%PaflKflaph
`
`[0025]); and
`
`reception circuitry, which in operation, receives information on a determined
`
`number of sector pairs consisting of a transmission sector and a reception sector in the
`
`MIMO training selected by the responder (Fig.2 @ 203; Paragraph(s) [0025, ][0028] and
`
`[OO41D;Forexanufla“responder 102 records the received signal quality
`
`(e.g.,
`
`signal—to—noise ratio (SNR))
`
`and determines a number or
`
`beam combinations
`
`(selected TX and RX sector pairs) based on the
`
`
`results 0:
`
`TX sector
`
`sweep and RX sector
`
`sweep/(Paagmmh[002fl)
`
`
`Fuflhen“Processor 203 proc ss s
`th r c iv d baseband signals and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`invokes di
`"erent
`"unctional modules to per orm "eatures in the
`
`device .”(Paragraph [0027])),
`
`wherein the transmitting antennas of the wireless device in the selected sector
`
`pairs differ from one another, and the receiving antennas of the responder in the
`
`
`
`
`selected sector pairs differ from one another. (read as “"n order to find the
`
`
`best beam combinations for multiple spatial streams,
`
`the
`
`
`selection criteria needs to include the mutual interference or
`
`
`
`
`l akag
`b tw n th spatial streams. A_cer considering the
`
`
`
`
`
`mutual interference or leakage,
`
`the besc cwo beam combinations
`
`
`are finally determined. For example, TX1—RX3 sector pair is
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431 ,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`
`
`
`
`
`selected “or a ‘irst spatial stream SS 1, and TX28—RX6 sector
`
`
`
`
`
`pair is selected for a second spatial stream SS 2 .” (Fig.6B;
`
`Page 9
`
`Paragraph [0042]))
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`6.
`
`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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed
`invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the
`
`claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was
`
`commonly owned as 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 effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly
`
`owned as 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 10
`
`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(a) are summarized as follows:
`
`:PPONT‘
`
`Determining the scope and contents of 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
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`Claims 2-3 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Wang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2013/0315325 A1) in view of
`
`Prasad et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2011/0110453 A1).
`
`Regarding claims 2 and 13, and as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, Wang et
`
`al. teaches a MIMO training method (Fig.1, 3, 5, 6B, 7, 8) and wireless device (Fig.2 @
`
`201) wherein the determined number of sector pairs are selected through measuring a
`
`received signal quality for all sector combinations of a transmission sector and a reception
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 11
`
`sector among the selected set of transmission sectors and the selected set of reception
`
`sectors (read as SNIR criteria (Paragraph(s) [0026], [0042])),
`
`selecting the combination having the highest received signal quality from among
`
`all the sector combinations (read as selecting a RX sector with the highest signal quality
`
`(Paragraph(s) [0041])),
`
`repeating selecting the combination and removing the combination until
`
`the
`
`determined number of sector pairs are selected.(Paragraph(s) [0038] and [0045])
`
`However, Wang et al.
`
`fail
`
`to explicitly teach removing the combination of the
`
`transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna selected for the sector pair from all the
`
`sector combinations
`
`Prasad et al. teach a method for removing the combination of the transmitting
`
`antenna and the receiving antenna selected for the sector pair from all the sector
`
`
`conflfinaflons Uead as‘h. update the best pair‘ 0: beams or sectors
`
`between
`
`two
`
`stations
`
`in
`
`the
`
`presence
`
`
`0:
`
`changing
`
`channel
`
`conditions (Paragraph [0025]))
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for updating best
`
`pair of beams or sectors as taught by Prasad et al. with the wireless device as taught by
`
`Wang et al. for the purpose of improving beamforming reception and transmission in
`
`devices in MIMO communication networks.
`
`Regarding claims 3 and 14, and as applied to claims 2 and 10 above, Wang et
`
`al., as modified by Prasad et al., teach a MIMO training method (Fig.1, 3, 5, 6B, 7, 8) and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 12
`
`wireless device (Fig.2 @ 201) wherein in a case where, in a first sector combination and
`
`a second sector combination among all the sector combinations,
`
`the receiving antenna for the first combination is the same as the receiving antenna
`
`for the second combination and the transmitting antenna for the first combination differs
`
`from the transmitting antenna for the second combination (Paragraph [0041] and [0042]),
`
`the received signal quality of the first sector combination is calculated by regarding
`
`the second sector combination as interference. (Paragraph(s) [0041], [0042] and [0045])
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/431,462
`Art Unit: 2479
`
`Page 13
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed
`
`7.
`
`to:
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`
`PO. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Hand-delivered responses should be brought to
`
`Customer Service Window
`
`Randolph Building
`401 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or early communications from the
`
`Examiner should be directed to Salvador E. Rivas whose telephone number is (571) 270-
`
`1784. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00AM to 3:30PM.
`
`If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Andrew W. Chriss can be reached on (571) 272- 1774. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this 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 -272-1 000.
`
`