DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, 8, 11-12, 15-16, 19, 22-25, 30, 34 and 37-48, 50-52, 54-55 are pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/20/2026 has been entered.
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 1, 3, 11, 15, 19, 22-23, 25, 34, 41, 44, 50, 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357).
Govinde (US 2016/0142761), and further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2012/0019239).
Claim 1 and 15, Smith teaches a method comprising:
“receiving, by one or more computing devices and from one or more second computing devices (i.e. CPEs 116), information indicating a plurality of user interactions (i.e. fast forward presses) of a first user interaction type” (i.e. fast forward presses) that occurred during output of a content stream (fig. 4B-C; p. 0052-0054);
“identifying an advertising time (402-2) after an end of the one or more first scenes (402-1) of the content stream” (fig. 4B)
information indicating, for the first object type, different weight values (i.e. thresholds) corresponding to different content item genres (i.e. content with black frames, or keywords) (p. 0076-0081); and
causing insertion of a second content item at the advertising time (p. 0032).
Smith is silent regarding the specific features of:
selecting, from weight data and based on a genre of the content stream, a weight value for use with the plurality of user interactions of the first user interaction type, wherein the weight data comprises:
a first weight value for the first user interaction type and for a first content genre; and
a second weight value for the first user interaction type and for a second content genre;
“identifying an advertising time based on: applying the selected weight value to the plurality of user interactions of the first user interaction type”.
Wang teaches the specific features of:
selecting, from weight data (i.e. moods) and based on a genre of the content stream (i.e. content genre is factored into the relationship of the user behaviors), a weight value (i.e. mood for determining undesired content) for use with the plurality of user interactions (i.e. user behavior) of the first user interaction type (i.e. click pace) (p. 0067-0073), wherein the weight data comprises:
a first weight value (i.e. user mood) for the first user interaction type (i.e. user click pace) and for a first content genre (i.e. click pace of a genre) (p. 0067-0073); and
a second weight value (i.e. other user mood) for the first user interaction type and for a second content genre (i.e. click pace of another genre) (p. 0067-0073);
“identifying an advertising time (i.e. undesired content) based on: applying the selected weight value to the plurality of user interactions of the first user interaction type” (i.e. mood determines undesired content which may be an advertisement) (p. 0049, 0067-0073).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided weight data as taught by Wang to the system of Smith to location ad slots based on mood (p. 0071).
Claim 3, Smith teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of user interactions associated with type first interaction type comprise at least one of:
tune-out events (i.e. fast forward) (p. 0053);
channel change events; or
volume change events.
Claim 11, Smith teaches The method of claim 8, wherein the plurality of user interactions further comprises a third set of user interactions (412-1, 412-2) associated with tune-out events (i.e. all interactions types, fast forward, rewind, etc.), and wherein the identifying the advertising time period is further based on second information (410-1) indicating a different likelihood (i.e. based on only one interaction type) that the tune-out events correspond to the commercial break (p. 0050-0054).
Claim 19, 44, 50 Smith teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the identifying the advertising location comprising determining one or more second scenes of the content stream comprising advertising content (i.e. detecting black frames that do not denote advertisement boundaries interpreted to mean multiple scenes in a non-advertising segment) (p. 0028).
Claim 22, Smith teaches regarding the method of claim 15, further comprising:
wherein causing insertion of the second content item (p. 0032) is based on:
a plurality of previous user interactions for a plurality of previous content streams (i.e. segments are previously watched) (fig. 4C; p. 0050-0054); or
the plurality of plurality of objects present in the plurality of previous content streams.
Claim 23, Smith teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first user interaction type corresponds to a pause (p. 0042-0046).
Claim 25, Smith teaches the specific feature of:
“wherein the weight data includes playback speed control interactions to indicate a commercial break” (i.e. fast forward) (p. 0050-0052).
Smith is silent regarding the specific features of:
“the weight data indicates that volume control interactions are more likely to indicate as compared to playback speed control interactions”.
Toebes teaches the specific feature of:
“the weight data (i.e. weight scores) indicates that volume control interactions (i.e. volume changes) are more likely to indicate (i.e. indicate attention level) as compared to playback speed control interactions” (i.e. other actions) (p. 0050-0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide attention level metrics as taught by Toebes to the system of Smith to differentiating user actions with weights (p. 0051).
Claim 34, 41, Smith teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising:
aggregating a second plurality of user interactions of a second user interaction type (i.e. rewind), wherein the identifying the advertising location is further based on a third weight value (i.e. using only rewind commands) indicating a likelihood that the second user interaction type corresponds to the commercial break when received during output of the content associated with the genre (i.e. quiz show) (p. 0050-0054, 0059-0063).
Smith teaches a third set of user interactions associating with fast forwarding (p. 0050-0052).
Claim 52, Smith teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of user interactions are a subset of total interactions occurring during the content stream, the method further comprising.
selecting the subset of the total interactions occurring during the content stream by selecting user interactions that are within a threshold time of a segment boundary of the content stream (p. 0042-0044).
Claim 8, 24, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Toebes et al. (US 2010/0095317).
Claim 8 is analyzed and interpreted with respect to claim 1. Claim 8 additionally recites “information indicating that volume changes and channel changes are to be weighted differently from channel changes”.
Smith teaches the specific feature of:
“information indicating that channel changes are to be weighted (i.e. using only fast forward behavior) (p. 0059-0061).
Toebes teaches the specific feature of:
information indicating that volume changes and channel changes are to be weighted differently from channel changes (i.e. volume changes and channel changes/unfavorable naivation control have different attention level weights) (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide attention level metrics as taught by Toebes to the system of Smith to differentiating user actions with weights (p. 0051).
Claim 24, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 15, wherein the first user interaction type corresponds to changes in audio volume.
Toebes teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first user interaction type corresponds to changes in audio volume (i.e. volume changes) (p. 0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide attention level metrics as taught by Toebes to the system of Smith to differentiating user actions with weights (p. 0051).
Claim 40, Smith is silent regarding The method of claim 1, further comprising:
selecting, from the weight data and based on a content object type of an object present in the content stream, an object weight value, wherein the weight data further comprises:
a first object weight for a first content object type and for the first content genre; and
a second object weight for the first content object type and for the second content genre;
a third object weight for a second content object type and for the first content genre; and
a fourth object weight for the second content object type and for the second content genre,
wherein the identifying the advertising time is further based on the selected object weight value.
Wang teaches the specific features of:
“a first object weight (i.e. mood) for the first content genre” (i.e. content genre is factored into the relationship of the user behaviors);
“a second object weight (i.e. other mood) for the second content genre” (i.e. content genre is factored into the relationship of the user behaviors);
wherein the identifying the advertising time (i.e. undesired content) is further based on the selected object weight value (i.e. mood determines undesired content which may be an advertisement) (p. 0049, 0067-0073).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided weight data as taught by Wang to the system of Smith to location ad slots based on mood (p. 0071).
Toebes teaches the specific features of:
“a first object weight for a first content object type” (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051);
“a second object weight for the first content object type” (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051);
“a third object weight for a second content object type” (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051);
“a fourth object weight for the second content object type” (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide attention level metrics as taught by Toebes to the system of Smith to differentiating user actions with weights (p. 0051).
Claim 12, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Toebes et al. (US 2010/0095317), and further in view of Olsen et al. (US 2014/0321831).
Claims 12, Smith is not entirely clear in teaching the method of claim 8, wherein the determining the plurality of user interactions comprises selecting the plurality of user interactions based on at least one of:
user age,
user location,
time of day, or
social media group.
Olsen teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the determining the plurality of user interactions comprises selecting the plurality of user interactions based on at least one of:
user age,
user location,
time of day (p. 0027), or
social media group.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide weighting user behavior as taught by Olsen to the system of Smith to collect playback statistics (p. 0040).
Claim 16, 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Chan et al. (US 2021/0089779).
Claims 16, 46 Smith is not entirely clear in teaching the method of claim 15, wherein the genre of the visual content comprises: sports, and wherein the object comprises a clock.
Chan teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the genre of the visual content comprises: sports, and wherein the object comprises a clock (p. 0423).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detection in sports as taught by Chan to the system of Smith to extract time information of a sports game.
Claim 30, 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Toebes et al. (US 2010/0095317), and further in view of Jeong et al. (US 2008/0022307).
Claim 30, 37, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, wherein weight data further comprises a third weight for a second user interaction type and the first content genre; and
a fourth weight for the second user interaction type and for the second content genre.
Toebes teaches the specific feature of:
“weight data further comprises a third weight for a second user interaction type” (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051);
“a fourth weight for the second user interaction type (i.e. any weight for any user input is envisioned)” (fig. 4B; p. 0050-0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide attention level metrics as taught by Toebes to the system of Smith to differentiating user actions with weights (p. 0051).
Jeong teaches the specific feature of:
“weight data further comprises a first content genre and a second content genre” (i.e. preference weight for a genre) (p. 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide weight data for a genre as taught by Jeong to the system of Smith to provide a weight for a genre for use in analyzing user activity (p. 0039).
Claim 38, 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2012/0019239).
Claim 38, 51 Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 15, wherein the identifying the advertising time period comprises:
determining that a first object is present in a first scene, of the one or more first scenes of the visual content, before the segment boundary; and
determining that the first object is not present in a subsequent scene, in the visual content, after the segment boundary.
Ryu teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the identifying the advertising time period comprises:
determining that a first object is present in a first scene, of the one or more first scenes of the visual content, before the segment boundary (fig. 1; p. 0016-0017); and
determining that the first object is not present in a subsequent scene, in the visual content, after the segment boundary (fig. 1; p. 0016-0017).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detector as taught by Ryu to the system of Kates to allow for scene recognition based on objects in the video (p. 0016).
Claim 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Govinde (US 2016/0142761).
Claim 39, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 15, wherein the first interaction type corresponds to changing the channel.
Govinde teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first interaction type corresponds to changing the channel (i.e. channel change) (p. 0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide channel changes indicating commercial spots as taught by Govinde to the system of Smith to provide correlation between channel changes and commercial times (p. 0035).
Claim 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Olsen et al. (US 2014/0321831), and further in view of Trabelsi et al. (US 2017/0243244).
Claim 42 Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a first weight for the first object type for the genre, and
determining a second weight for the first object type and for a different genre.
Olsen teaches the specific features of:
“determining a first weight for the first object type” (i.e. weights are different for every interaction, different genres are within the scope of the type of content in Olsen) (p. 0040, 0046), and
“determining a second weight for the first object type” (i.e. weights are different for every interaction, different genres are within the scope of the type of content in Olsen) (p. 0040, 0046), and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide weighting user behavior as taught by Olsen to the system of Smith to collect playback statistics (p. 0040, 0046).
Trabelsi teaches the specific feature of
“weighting for a content genre” (p. 0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided weighting of user interactions of different categories as taught by Trabelsi to the system of Kates to allow for confidence level of taste matching (p. 0023).
Claim 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Chand et al. (US 2015/0256899).
Claim 43 Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, wherein genre of the content stream comprises comedy, and wherein the object comprises a logo.
Chand teaches The method of claim 1, wherein genre of the visual content comprises at least one of: comedy , situation comedy, action, drama, sports (i.e. action) (p. 0050).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detection in programming as taught by Chand to the system of Smith to identity relevant logos within a frame (p. 0050).
Claim 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Jones (US 2016/0337705).
Claim 45, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, further comprising:
discarding a second segment boundary subsequent to the first segment boundary, wherein the discarding is based on determining a quantity of time between the second segment boundary and the first segment boundary.
Jones teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
discarding a second segment boundary subsequent to the first segment boundary, wherein the discarding is based on determining a quantity of time between the second segment boundary and the first segment boundary (i.e. discarding second scene) (claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided processing scene changes as taught by Jones to the system of Smith to allow for scene boundary detection (claim 1).
Claim 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2012/0019239), and further in view of Chan et al. (US 2021/0089779).
Claim 46, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, wherein the identifying the advertising time comprises weighting display of a clock differently based on the genre of the content stream.
Chan teaches the specific feature of:
“display of a clock” (p. 0423).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detection in sports as taught by Chan to the system of Kates to extract time information of a sports game.
Ryu teaches the specific feature of:
“weighting display of an object differently based on the genre of the content stream (i.e. determining genre based on the object and how it is categorized) (p. 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detector as taught by Ryu to the system of Smith to allow for scene recognition based on objects in the video (p. 0016).
Claim 47-48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2012/0019239), and further in view of Shkedi et al. (US 2009/0172723), and further in view of Oddo et al. (US 2007/0169148).
Claim 47-48, Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, wherein the identifying the advertising time period further comprises:
determining, based on one or more objects, a total value; and
comparing the total value to a threshold, wherein the threshold is based on a genre of the content stream.
Ryu teaches the specific feature of “one or more object types” (p. 0016-0017).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detector as taught by Ryu to the system of Smith to allow for scene recognition based on objects in the video (p. 0016).
Oddo teaches the method of claim 1, further comprises:
determining, a total value (i.e. score) (p. 0136); and
comparing the total value to a threshold, wherein the threshold is based on a genre of the content stream (p. 0136).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided an overall score as taught by Oddo to the system of Smith to allow for measuring genres (p. 0136).
Claim 54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Hayes et al. (US 2010/0125875)
Claim 54. Smith is silent regarding the method of claim 1, wherein the weight data further comprises:
a first object weight value for clocks appearing in sporting events; and
a second object weight value for clocks appearing in non-sporting events; and
wherein the method further comprises:
selecting, from the weight data, an object weight value based on a clock object appearing in the content stream and based on the genre of the content stream, and
wherein the identifying the advertising time is further based on the selected object weight value.
Wang teaches the specific feature of:
“wherein the identifying the advertising time is further based on the selected object weight value” (i.e. mood determines undesired content which may be an advertisement) (p. 0049, 0067-0073).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided weight data as taught by Wang to the system of Smith to location ad slots based on mood (p. 0071).
Hayes teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first object type comprises a clock, and wherein the first information specifies:
a first object weight value for clocks appearing in sporting events (p. 0039); and
a second object weight value for clocks appearing in non-sporting events (i.e. using context determination when detecting a sports clock) (p. 0039-0040);
wherein the method further comprises:
selecting, from the weight data, an object weight value based on a clock object appearing in the content stream and based on the genre of the content stream (i.e. using context determination when detecting a sports clock) (p. 0039-0040).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide clock recognition as taught by Hayes to the system of Smith to allow for context analysis of detected objects (p. 0039).
Claim 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 2021/0021885) in view of Wang (US 2016/0044357), and further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2012/0019239), and further in view of Chand et al. (US 2015/0256899).
Claim 55, Smith is not entirely clear in teaching the method of claim 1, wherein weight data further comprises:
a first object weight value for logos in the first content genre; and
a second object weight value for logos in the second content genre;
wherein the method further comprises:
selecting, from the weight data, an object weight value based on a logo object appearing in the content stream and based on the genre of the content stream, and
wherein the identifying the advertising time is further based on the selected object weight value.
Wang teaches the specific feature of:
“selecting object weight value (i.e. mood) based on the genre of the content stream“ (i.e. content genre is factored into the relationship of the user behaviors) (p. 0049, 0067-0073);
wherein the identifying the advertising time is further based on the selected object weight value (i.e. undesired content) (p. 0049, 0067-0073).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided weight data as taught by Wang to the system of Smith to location ad slots based on mood (p. 0071).
Ryu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first information specifies:
a first object weight (i.e. using context analysis) for an object (i.e. detected object name) when in a first content genre (i.e. genre information) (p. 0016-0018); and
a second object weight (i.e. using context analysis) for an object (i.e. detected object name) when in a second content genre (i.e. genre information) (p. 0016-0018).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detector as taught by Ryu to the system of Smith to allow for scene recognition based on objects in the video (p. 0016).
Chand teaches the specific feature:
“object being a logo” (p. 0050).
selecting, from the weight data (of Ryu), an object weight value based on a logo object appearing in the content stream and based on the genre of the content stream (i.e. determines season and episode and other additional information based on the logo) (p. 0050).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to provide object detection in programming as taught by Chand to the system of Smith to identity relevant logos within a frame (p. 0050).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 8, 11-12, 15-16, 19, 22-25, 30, 34 and 37-48, 50-52, 54-55 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Claims 1, 3, 8, 11-12, 15-16, 19, 22-25, 30, 34 and 37-48, 50-52, 54-55 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20170373774 A1 LOUREDA; Jose Sanchez et al. – audience measurement system.
US 9148706 B1 Shin; Brian J. – enthusiasm metric
US 20150135206 A1 Reisman; Richard – clickstream data
US 20140379469 A1 Cipolletta; Anthony Luigi et al. – trending indicators for weight categories
US 20130247080 A1 Vinson; Michael et al – viewing behavior measuring devices
US 20120278331 A1 Campbell; Ray et al. . – aggregating user behavior
US 20110072448 A1 Stiers; Todd et al. – channel change scores
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSHFIKH I ALAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1710. The examiner can normally be reached on 1:00PM-9:00PM.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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 571-272-1000.
MUSHFIKH I. ALAM
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2426
/MUSHFIKH I ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 6/2/2026
Prosecution Insights