DETAILED FINAL OFFICE ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant’s filing a Response dated 08/24/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
The instant application is a reissue application of U.S. Patent No. 9,008,491, hereinafter “the ‘491Patent”. Based upon Applicant’s statements as set forth in the instant application and after the Examiner's independent review of the ‘491 Patent itself and its prosecution history, the Examiner finds that he cannot locate any ongoing proceeding before the Office or current ongoing litigation involving the ‘491 Patent. Furthermore, based upon the Examiner's independent review of the ‘491 Patent itself and the prosecution history, the Examiner cannot locate any previous reexaminations, supplemental examinations, or certificates of correction.
Reissue
For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions. This reissue application was filed 04/14/2017. Thus, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 made in this application are to the current provisions.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which the ‘491 Patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification and/or claims must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 5-11, 20, 40, 43, and 45-46 have been considered.
Withdrawal of Objection under 37 CFR § 1.173(c)
The objection under 37 CFR § 1.173(c) regarding the typographical presentation of markings in the newly presented claims is WITHDRAWN. The substitute claim listing submitted in the Response conforms to the marking rules governing reissue applications.
B. Withdrawal of Claim Objection Regarding Typographical Error
The prior objection to Claim 1 regarding the grammatical informality in the wherein clause ("associated is one of") has been resolved by Applicant’s amendment ("associated with one of"). The objection is WITHDRAWN.
C. Withdrawal of Rejection Under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, Fourth Paragraph
The rejection of Claim 7 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, fourth paragraph (alleged failure to further limit base Claim 1) is WITHDRAWN.
Independent Claim 1 recites "storing data sufficient to reproduce a still image." Claim 7 specifies that said data "is an image file." Claim 8 alternatively specifies that said data "comprises a timestamp and a reference to the motion video sequence stored in a memory." Under BRI, an image file represents a specific, bounded species of reproductive data distinct from temporal pointer/reference metadata. Therefore, Claim 7 properly specifies a narrowing limitation of the subject matter of Claim 1, in compliance with pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, fourth paragraph.
D. Consideration of Applicant's Arguments Concerning Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s arguments concerning the printed matter doctrine, the "tri-split display" of Heather, and the assertion that Heather "teaches away" from placing textual tags within the video display area have been fully considered. The rejections are maintained in reformulated fashion as set forth below:
Printed Matter Doctrine: The Office concedes Applicant's traversal on this point and withdraws reliance on the printed matter doctrine as a means to discount the recitation of "multi-character text" or "multi-character word." Instead, the textual limitation is fully mapped as a structural/functional teaching disclosed in Rogers (US Pub. 2005/0229227).
Applicant's Allegation of "Teaching Away": Applicant asserts that Heather teaches away from placing descriptive text over the video player 200 based on paragraph [0005], which mentions avoiding obstruction of video playback. Under controlling Federal Circuit precedent, a reference does not teach away simply by disclosing an alternative design or expressing a preferred layout (In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2004); In re Haruna, 249 F.3d 1327, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2001)). Heather's use of a separate sidebar 210 does not criticize, discredit, or disparage overlay tags, nor does it demonstrate that on-screen overlay tags are inoperative. Otto explicitly teaches displaced on-screen signal elements / hint markings (signal elements 35) overlaid directly onto the video display area, and Rogers teaches incorporating descriptive text into tags. Combining these elements according to known methods yields predictable results without rendering Heather inoperable (KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6–11, 20, 43, and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Lack of Antecedent Basis (MPEP § 2173.05(e))
In Claim 1 (and identically in Claim 20), the claim recites:
"causing the display device to display at least one visually perceptible tag contemporaneously with said item in the motion video sequence..."
Subsequently, in the same clause, the claim recites:
"such that nothing other than the motion video sequence and said one or more gadget tags occupy the two-dimensional area when said one or more gadget tags are displayed with the motion video sequence;"
The claim contains no prior recitation or positive introduction of "one or more gadget tags". The prior clause recites only "at least one visually perceptible tag". Consequently, there is an absolute lack of antecedent basis for the term "said one or more gadget tags".
Ambiguity and Internal Inconsistency (MPEP § 2173.05(h), (i))
The terminal clause of Claim 1 (and Claim 20) introduces an explicit Markush-style alternative:
"wherein either the tag is a gadget tag associated with one of an electronic item, an appliance, or a vehicle or the tag is a scene tag associated with a color, a furniture item, a plant, a location, or a climate."
Because the claim permits the displayed tag to be a "scene tag", the negative limitation requiring that "nothing other than the motion video sequence and said one or more gadget tags occupy the two-dimensional area" introduces an irreconcilable ambiguity. If the system displays a scene tag, the presence of the scene tag within the two-dimensional area violates the negative limitation that only gadget tags and the video sequence may occupy the area. A POSITA cannot determine the metes and bounds of the claim scope when practicing the scene tag alternative.
All dependent claims are rejected for their dependency on the above rejected independent claims.
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-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1, 3, 6–11, 20, 40, 43, 45, and 46 are REJECTED under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Heather et al. (US Pub. 2008/0109841) in view of Otto et al. (U.S. Pat. 8,863,199), and further in view of Rogers et al. (US Pub. 2005/0229227).
CLAIM 1
A method comprising:
Heather teaches a method of processing, presenting, and interacting with media content across display devices (Heather, Abstract; ¶¶ [0005]–[0012]).
causing a display device to present a motion video sequence for a period of time, the motion video sequence depicting an item during at least some of said period of time, the motion video sequence spatially spanning a two-dimensional area of the display device such that the motion video sequence completely fills the two-dimensional area such that no part of the motion video sequence appears outside of the two-dimensional area and such that nothing other than the motion video sequence occupies the two-dimensional area;
Heather teaches causing a display device to present a motion video sequence for a period of time in a designated player window (media player 200), wherein the motion video sequence depicts one or more items (e.g., apparel, products) during at least some of said period of time (Heather, Fig. 2, media player window 200; ¶¶ [0005], [0030], [0036], [0074]–[0075]).
Analysis Under BRI: A video player viewport or display window in a graphical user interface defines a bounded two-dimensional geometric area (width X height). By definition of digital video rendering, the decoded motion video frames are mapped to and completely fill the pixel boundaries of the viewport (window 200) such that no portion of the video frames extends outside window 200. Prior to the generation of overlays, the video raster data occupies the entire area of window 200, and nothing other than the video occupies that dedicated display area.
Heather thus fully teaches this limitation.
causing the display device to display at least one visually perceptible tag contemporaneously with said item in the motion video sequence, wherein the tag comprises descriptive multi-character text comprising at least one multi-character word providing information describing said item, wherein the tag and the descriptive text appear completely within the two-dimensional area, and wherein the tag and the text are separate and displaced from said item in the two-dimensional area such that nothing other than the motion video sequence and said one or more gadget tags occupy the two-dimensional area when said one or more gadget tags are displayed with the motion video sequence;
Heather teaches causing the display device to display at least one visually perceptible tag (highlight/outline) contemporaneously with said item in the motion video sequence (Heather, Abstract; Fig. 13; ¶¶ [0030], [0036], [0056], [0062], [0091], [0093], [0099], [0100]–[0104]).
Deficiency of Heather: Heather displays descriptive text associated with the item in a separate side panel (product information area 210) rather than displaying the descriptive text within a tag located inside the video player area (window 200) separate and displaced from the item.
Otto teaches displaying an additional visual indicia / signal element (signal elements 35 / hint markings) positioned within the viewable display area of the video sequence, where the additional signal element is displayed as an associated indicia having a location adjacent to but distinct and displaced from the corresponding depicted item (Otto, Fig. 5; col. 1, ll. 49–63; col. 6, ll. 22–40; col. 9, ll. 39–53; Claims 1, 9, 15, 18). Otto’s signal elements 35 illustrated in Figure 5 show numerical digits or single letters rather than multi-character descriptive word text describing the item (see Otto, col. 6, ll. 35–40; col. 9, ll. 42–46).
Rogers teaches interactive video tagging systems wherein visually perceptible tags displayed in association with tagged objects comprise descriptive multi-character text comprising at least one multi-character word providing information describing the tagged item (e.g., brand names, product titles, descriptions) (Rogers, Fig. 22; ¶¶ [0061], [0081], [0087]–[0099], [0104], [0140]–[0142]). When Otto's displaced on-screen signal elements / hint markings (occupying a sub-region within the video window) are populated with Rogers' descriptive multi-character word text and superimposed over Heather's video sequence within window 200, the two-dimensional area bounded by window 200 contains only the underlying video sequence and the displaced tag overlay elements.
It would have been obvious to a POSITA at the time of the invention to modify Heather’s video display by incorporating Otto’s in-frame displaced signal elements / markings and populating those tags with Rogers’ descriptive multi-character word text. The motivation to incorporate displaced on-screen tags directly over the active video area as taught by Otto, rather than confining descriptions to Heather’s separate sidebar 210, is to maintain the viewer’s visual focus directly on the video action, minimizing split-attention effects and visual fatigue. The motivation to include Rogers’ multi-character descriptive words within Otto’s tags is to provide immediate, contextually rich product information directly to the viewer at the moment the item appears, eliminating the need to cross-reference an external pane. This combination represents the predictable combination of prior art GUI elements (video player, displaced overlay indicia, and descriptive text) according to known methods to yield predictable results (KSR, 550 U.S. at 416).
accepting from a user, during the period of time, while the motion video sequence is playing and without causing the motion video sequence to stop playing, an input to take a still-frame snapshot of the motion video sequence with a tag of interest displayed with the motion video sequence at a moment; and
Heather explicitly teaches accepting user input to capture a still-frame snapshot (captured frame) of the active video along with the displayed tag/highlight while the video is playing and without pausing or stopping playback (Heather, Abstract: "While the active video is displayed in a first or primary display, a captured frame may be displayed in a secondary display... Therefore, in the display, the active video may be maintained, with a display of the captured frame"; Fig. 6, steps 606–608; ¶¶ [0074]–[0075]).
in response to accepting the input, storing data sufficient to reproduce a still image from the motion video sequence with the tag of interest at the moment,
Heather teaches that in response to accepting the capture input, the system stores data sufficient to reproduce the still image (captured frame) from the motion video sequence with the tag/associated item information in a computer memory / user gallery (Heather, Fig. 6, steps 610–618; ¶¶ [0077]–[0079], [0083]).
wherein either the tag is a gadget tag associated with one of an electronic item, an appliance, or a vehicle or the tag is a scene tag associated with a color, a furniture item, a plant, a location, or a climate.
Heather teaches tagging commercial products depicted in video sequences, including consumer apparel and consumer electronics (Heather, ¶¶ [0005], [0030], [0036]). Heather does not explicitly recite that the tagged item is specifically a vehicle.
Rogers explicitly teaches tracking and tagging objects in video streams, including "actors or automobiles" (Rogers, ¶ [0131]). An automobile is an identical species of the genus "vehicle". Because the limitation is recited in the alternative ("either... or"), Rogers’ explicit disclosure of tagging an automobile (a vehicle) fully satisfies the limitation. It would have been obvious to a POSITA to apply the video tagging methods of Heather to vehicles (automobiles) as taught by Rogers. The motivation was to expand the catalog of interactive, purchasable, or identifiable items in digital media to include automotive products, which was a well-known commercial objective in multimedia advertising. Applying established object-tagging software to automobiles yields predictable results (KSR, 550 U.S. at 417).
Claim 3
A method according to claim 1, further comprising: causing the display device to present a connector visually linking the item depicted in the motion video sequence and an associated tag, and wherein the still image includes the connector.
Heather teaches that the still image includes the visual highlight/tag graphics that link the depicted product to its description (Heather, Fig. 13; ¶¶ [0030], [0056], [0074]–[0079]). Heather fails to explicitly disclose a distinct line segment connector. Otto explicitly teaches presenting a visual connector (connection line) that visually links the depicted image element and its associated hint marking / signal element for a designated period of time (Otto, col. 6, ll. 41–48; Claim 19).
It would have been obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Otto’s visual connection line into the interactive display of Heather. The motivation was to provide an unmistakable visual pointer linking the displaced tag directly to its corresponding moving item, thereby preventing visual confusion when multiple objects appear simultaneously within the frame. Adding Otto's connection line involves the predictable application of standard GUI visual cues.
Claim 6
A method according to claim 1, wherein the input is depression of a combination of keys on a keyboard.
Heather explicitly teaches accepting user input via keyboard key depressions to capture a snapshot (Heather, ¶ [0074], steps 606, 608). Heather thus fully teaches this limitation.
Claim 7
A method according to claim 1, wherein the data sufficient to reproduce the still image from the motion video sequence with the tag of interest is an image file.
Heather teaches storing and transmitting the captured still frame as an image file stored in memory/gallery storage (Heather, ¶ [0083], steps 610–618).
Claim 8
A method according to claim 1, wherein the data sufficient to reproduce the still image from the motion video sequence comprises a timestamp and a reference to the motion video sequence stored in a memory.
Heather explicitly teaches storing a timestamp and a pointer/reference to the video sequence stored in memory (Heather, ¶ [0032]).
Claim 9
A method according to claim 1, further comprising: causing the display device to display the still image in response to an input signifying a desire to display the still image.
Heather teaches displaying the stored still image in response to a user command requesting access to the saved user gallery (Heather, Fig. 6, steps 610–618; ¶ [0083]).
Claim 10
A method according to claim 1, further comprising: causing the still image to be included in a message.
Heather teaches incorporating the captured still image into an electronic transmission message across a network to another device (Heather, Fig. 2, item 218 ["SHARE item"]; ¶¶ [0031], [0083]).
Claim 11
A method according to claim 10, wherein the message is an email.
Heather explicitly discloses transmitting the captured image via email (Heather, ¶¶ [0031], [0083]).
Claim 43
A method according to claim 3, wherein the connector comprises a line segment extending between the gadget depicted in the video sequence and its associated tag.
Heather and Otto teach the method of Claim 3 as set forth above.
Otto explicitly discloses that the visual connector is a connection line extending between the depicted object and the associated hint marking / signal element (Otto, col. 6, ll. 41–48; Claim 19).
Obvious over Heather in view of Otto for the reasons set forth under Claim 3.
CLAIM 20
A non-transitory computer-readable medium on which are embedded instructions for execution by a computer, the instructions comprising: instructions to cause a display device to present a motion video sequence... instructions to cause the display device to display at least one visually perceptible tag... instructions to accept from a user... while the motion video sequence is playing and without causing the motion video sequence to stop playing, an input to take a still-frame snapshot... instructions to store... data sufficient to reproduce a still image... wherein either the tag is a gadget tag... or a scene tag...
Claim 20 recites the identical executable steps of Claim 1 embodied as computer-executable instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. Heather explicitly teaches executing these methods via software executed on a computer system comprising memory and readable media (Heather, ¶¶ [0023]–[0026], [0083]).
The mapping of Heather, Otto, and Rogers, as well as the KSR rationales set forth above for Claim 1, apply identically to Claim 20.
CLAIM 40
Most of claim 40 is similar in nature to claims 1 and 20 and are rejected as stated above. More specific limitations that need addressed are as follows:
instructions to cause a display device to present a motion video sequence for a period of time, the motion video sequence depicting one or more gadgets during at least some of said period of time, the motion video sequence spatially spanning a two-dimensional area of the display device such that the motion video sequence completely fills said two-dimensional area such that no part of the motion video sequence appears outside of the two-dimensional area and such that nothing other than the motion video sequence occupies the two-dimensional area;
Heather teaches presenting a video sequence filling a designated display window 200 depicting items for a period of time, executed by software stored on a computer-readable medium (Heather, Figs. 2, 6; ¶¶ [0023]–[0026], [0030], [0036], [0074]–[0075]).
Heather teaches depicting consumer electronics, satisfying the term "gadgets" (Heather, ¶ [0030]).
instructions to, in response to acceptance of an input, cause one or more gadget tags to be displayed with the motion video sequence, wherein said one or more gadget tags comprises descriptive multi-character text comprising at least one multi-character word providing information describing respective one of said one or more gadgets, wherein a gadget tag and its descriptive text appear completely within the two-dimensional area, and wherein said one or more gadget tags appear completely with the two-dimensional area, and wherein said one or more gadget tags are separate and displaced from said one or more gadgets in the two-dimensional area such that nothing other than the motion video sequence and said one or more gadget tags occupy the two-dimensional area when said one or more gadget tags are displayed with the motion video sequence;
Heather teaches displaying visual tags/highlights in response to user input (Heather, Abstract; Fig. 6, steps 602–606; ¶¶ [0074]–[0075]). Heather displays textual descriptions in side pane 210.
Otto teaches displaying displaced indicia / signal elements (signal elements 35) located completely within the viewable boundaries of the video display area and separate and displaced from the depicted items (Otto, Fig. 5; col. 1, ll. 49–63; col. 6, ll. 22–40; col. 9, ll. 39–53; Claims 1, 9, 15, 18).
Rogers teaches providing multi-character descriptive word text within tags to describe depicted gadgets/items (Rogers, Fig. 22; ¶¶ [0061], [0081], [0087]–[0099], [0104], [0140]–[0142]).
It is obvious to combine for the reasons set forth under Limitation 1.3.
instructions to, in response to acceptance of an input, while the motion video sequence is playing and without causing the motion video sequence to stop playing, store data sufficient to reproduce a still-frame snapshot image of the motion video sequence with a gadget tag of interest displayed in the motion video sequence; and
Heather explicitly teaches storing data sufficient to reproduce a still frame captured during continuous playback without interrupting or stopping the video (Heather, Abstract; Fig. 6, steps 606–610; ¶¶ [0074]–[0075]).
wherein the gadget tags are visually perceptible and comprise text providing information about said gadgets, wherein the text appears completely within the two dimensional-area, and wherein the text is separate and displaced from its associated gadget, and
Taught by Heather in view of Otto and Rogers as detailed under Limitations 1.3 and 40.2.
wherein the gadget is one of an electronic item, an appliance, or a vehicle.
Rogers explicitly teaches video tracking and tagging of automobiles (vehicles) (Rogers, ¶ [0131]).
Heather teaches tagging consumer electronic items (Heather, ¶ [0030]).
Obvious for the reasons articulated under Limitation 1.6.
Claim 45
A non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 20, further comprising: instructions to cause the display device to present a connector visually linking an item depicted in the motion video sequence and an associated tag, and wherein the still image includes the connector, wherein the connector comprises a line segment extending between the item depicted in the motion video sequence and its associated tag.
Taught by Heather in view of Otto as set forth under Claims 3 and 43, embodied as software instructions on a computer-readable medium.
Claim 46
A non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 40, further comprising: instructions to cause the display device to present a connector visually linking a gadget depicted in the motion video sequence and an associated gadget tag, and wherein the still image includes the connector, wherein the connector comprises a line segment extending between the gadget depicted in the motion video sequence and its associated gadget tag.
Taught by Heather in view of Otto as set forth under Claims 3 and 43, embodied as software instructions on a computer-readable medium.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heather, Otto, and Rogers, and in further view of Nygaard et al. U.S. Patent No. 8,010,987, (hereinafter Nygaard).
Claim 5
A method according to claim 1, further comprising: causing the display device to display a snapshot button, and wherein the input is clicking the snapshot button.
Heather teaches capturing snapshots during continuous playback via user input (e.g., keyboard commands) (Heather, ¶ [0074], steps 606, 608). Heather fails to explicitly disclose displaying an on-screen snapshot button or capturing the snapshot by clicking said on-screen button.
Nygaard teaches an interactive video playback system wherein an on-screen visual indicator icon (snapshot enabled (SE) icon 70) is displayed directly on the screen (television display 20) during video playback to notify the viewer that snapshot taking is enabled (Nygaard, Figs. 1A–1D; col. 12, ll. 58–62). Nygaard further teaches accepting user input to execute snapshot capture substantially when the desired frame is rendered on the display during playback (Nygaard, col. 13, ll. 1–8; col. 21, ll. 11–13; Claim 1). In Nygaard's specific embodiment, the user input is entered via a dedicated key on a remote control (RC 50, yellow key, col. 13, ll. 4–8) or telephone keypad rather than clicking the on-screen snapshot enabled icon 70 directly with a pointing device.
It would have been obvious to a POSITA at the time of the invention to modify Heather’s interactive user interface by displaying Nygaard’s on-screen snapshot indicator icon 70 during video playback, and further to configure said on-screen icon as an interactive, clickable GUI snapshot button (wherein the user input is clicking the snapshot button). Displaying interactive buttons on a screen and activating associated software routines via mouse clicks or cursor control were ubiquitous, well-established user interface techniques (as further corroborated by Otto, col. 8, ll. 63–65 and col. 9, ll. 11–12, teaching mouse-controlled cursor selection in video interfaces). A POSITA seeking to improve user interaction in Heather would be motivated to configure Nygaard’s on-screen snapshot indicator icon 70 as a clickable GUI button in order to provide direct manipulation, allowing single-click execution via a pointing device (mouse) without requiring the user to look away from the display or memorize physical keyboard combinations or remote control buttons. Implementing a known on-screen visual indicator icon (Nygaard's icon 70) as a clickable GUI button is an ordinary, predictable design choice involving the combination of known graphical elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (KSR, 550 U.S. at 416–417).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E. ENGLAND whose telephone number is (571)272-3912. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached on 571-270-1367. 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.
DAVID E. ENGLAND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3992
/DAVID E ENGLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees: /CHARLES R CRAVER/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992 /M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
