DETAILED ACTION
Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is filed in response to Applicant’s Request for Continued Examination dated December 29, 2025. Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-21, and 23 are currently amended, claims 24-25 are new, and claims 1, 2, 5, 7-21, and 23-25 are pending in the application and have been fully considered by Examiner.
The non-statutory provisional double patenting rejections over Application No. 17/446,153 have been withdrawn as the application went abandoned on January 12, 2026.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the prior art rejections have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented herein.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 29, 2025, has been entered.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst (US 20050125422, hereinafter Hirst) in view of Sittel et al. (US 20200081986, hereinafter Sittel).
With respect to claim 1, Hirst discloses A system comprising:
a memory; and a hardware processor coupled to the memory (e.g., Fig. 8 and associated text, e.g., [0042], The computer 812 includes a processing unit 814, a system memory 816.), the hardware processor configured to:
extract features from data associated with a , wherein the features indicate respective attributes of the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0008], software [code] development documentation; [0026], one or more items 120 in a documentation set; [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as …a code snippet is malfunctioning … not enough information; [0029], Based on feedback received by the analyzer 110, positive and/or corrective commentary can be automatically categorized.), and wherein the features are extracted by performing at least the following operations:
automatically learn rules using a natural language processor (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components … For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary [NLP], wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric based upon learning processes applied to training members or data of the attribute's class or topic; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.); and
analyze the data associated with the , using the natural language processor, to determine the features, which indicate the respective attributes of the , using natural language processing by applying the rules to the data (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components. This may also include artificial intelligence techniques, automated classification methods, inference analysis, probability analysis, statistical processing, and components such as neural networks. For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.), wherein at least a subset of the features indicates that information in the has at least one of a usability, a completeness, a correctness, or an ambiguity that is within a specified range of values (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], metrics [features] such as … a spelling error … a code snippet is malfunctioning … not enough information; [0038], FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues … information is incorrect; [0028] analyzing quality scores from the scoring component 150 in view of predetermined thresholds [specified range of value] ... Likewise, scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.);
assign weights to the features (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric.); and
based at least in part on the weights that are assigned to the features satisfying a designated condition, execute an instruction that causes the to incorporate a revision of the information in the by at least one of increasing the usability, increasing the completeness, increasing the correctness, or decreasing the ambiguity of the information in (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0038], quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues and a graphical depiction of the weighting … of an issue [feature] … These metrics may include … information is incorrect; [0027], metrics such as … a spelling error; [0028], scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set; [0010], A rules engine interprets the items in view of one or more quality metrics by applying the metrics to the items in order to determine perceived problems (or benefits) with the items, facilitate remediation of the problems.).
Although Hirst discloses software development documentation (see above), it does not appear to disclose the following, which is taught in analogous art, Sittel: readme file that includes information about an other file that is included in a directory or archive of at least one of code or an application programming interface (API) … readme file … readme file … readme file … readme file about the other file that is included in the directory or archive of the at least one of the code or the API … readme file … readme file about the other file that is included in the directory or archive of the at least one of the code or the API … the readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0045], Source code languages include but are not limited to … ISML … source code management is implemented using Git. In another case, Perforce, Subversion or other version control software can be utilized as a repository; [0046], extractor 132 for extracting tagged text, including comments, from the set of code files; [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62] and [0069].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel, such that the software development documentation includes a readme file, because readme files are ubiquitous for any source code project and allow developers to provide necessary information about their code.
With respect to claim 7, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates a readability of the , from the data associated with the (e.g., Figs. 14 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document or indicate a minor problem such as a spelling error.) and Sittel further teaches readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0045], Source code languages include but are not limited to … ISML … source code management is implemented using Git. In another case, Perforce, Subversion or other version control software can be utilized as a repository; [0046], extractor 132 for extracting tagged text, including comments, from the set of code files; [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62] and [0069].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sabharwal et al. (US 20230045900, hereinafter Sabharwal; see IDS filed on 1/27/25).
With respect to claim 2, Hirst also discloses assign the weights to the features using a model a key performance indicator associated with the , the key performance indicator specifying an extent to which the satisfies a criterion (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components … For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0028], scores [performance indicator] below the threshold [criterion] can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.); and
provide criteria satisfaction information regarding the , the criteria satisfaction information indicating whether the satisfies the criterion associated with the key performance indicator (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0028], The filter 160 may have a predetermined threshold set up such that scores for an item 120 that exceed the threshold (e.g., scores above 60) invoke automated procedures such as tagging the item to indicate a beneficial quality associated with the item that can merit replication of the beneficial quality throughout (or potions) of the documentation set. Likewise, scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set; [0034], The interface 200 includes a scores component 230 to view scores associated with an item.) and Sittel further teaches readme file … readme file … readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Although Hirst as modified discloses assigning weights and a key performance indicator associated with the readme file (see above in), it does not appear to disclose based at least in part on. However, this is taught in analogous art, Sabharwal (e.g., Fig. 1 and associated text, e.g., [0027], assigning weights to the one or more features associated with the each of the plurality of performance parameters based on a predefined evaluation criterion. The predefined evaluation criterion may include one or more of complexity of issues, an expertise level and a resolution quality of issues, and wherein high weights are assigned to one or more features from the set of features associated with the complexity of issues, and the resolution quality of issues as compared to the expertise level.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the performance criterion-based weighting invention of Sabharwal because “improving the quality,” is difficult, as suggested by Hirst (see [0006]) and the invention of Sabharwal allows for emphasizing the resolution quality issue, as suggested by Sabharwal (see [0027], “The predefined evaluation criterion may include … resolution quality of issues.”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kania (US 20090288072, hereinafter Kania).
With respect to claim 5, Hirst also discloses to extract at least one of the features from the data associated with the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0008], software development documentation; [0026], one or more items 120 in a documentation set; [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] … metrics 140 can include a bug exists … code snippet is malfunctioning; [0029], Based on feedback received by the analyzer 110, positive and/or corrective commentary can be automatically categorized.) and Sittel further teaches the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Although Hirst as modified discloses code that is included in the readme file (see above), it does not appear to disclose execute code that is included in. However, this is taught in analogous art, Kania (e.g., Figs. 2-3 and associated text, e.g., [0023], code samples are extracted from the documentation and moved into a test case dump file, which is executed later via a test framework on the real software and produces an output that is correct or incorrect, depending on whether or not the code samples are error-free. If the test case fails, it means that the documentation contained an error for this test case of this extracted piece of code from the documentation.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the documentation code testing invention of Kania because bugs in documentation code are an important measure of document quality and the invention of Kania “automatically identifies errors in software documentation,” as suggested by Kania (see [0003]).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dean et al. (US 20110179023, hereinafter Dean).
With respect to claim 8, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates , from the data associated with the the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose that a number of users who use … is within a specified range of numbers. However, this is taught in analogous art, Dean (e.g., Figs. 4-5 and associated text, e.g., [0033] a raw count 510, which could be an absolute or relative number corresponding to the number of users who have visited the document; [0025], scores are assigned to each document based on the usage information … the usage information comprises both unique visitor information; [0028], If the unique user is less than 10, it equals 0.5*UU/10.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Dean because “there exists … a need to develop other techniques for determining the importance of documents,” as suggested by Dean (see [0004]).
With respect to claim 9, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates , from the data associated with the the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose that a number of times the … is viewed is within a specified range of numbers. However, this is taught in analogous art, Dean (e.g., Figs. 4-5 and associated text, e.g., [0029], the raw count may represent the total number of times that a document has been visited; [0025], scores are assigned to each document based on the usage information … the usage information comprises … frequency of visit information; [0028], The frequency of visit score equals log 2 (1+log(VF)/log(MAXVF). VF is the number of times that the document was visited (or accessed) in one month, and MAXVF is set to 2000.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Dean because “there exists … a need to develop other techniques for determining the importance of documents,” as suggested by Dean (see [0004]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lai et al. (US 20130110863, hereinafter Lai).
With respect to claim 10, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates , from the data associated with the metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document or indicate a minor problem such as a spelling error.) and Sittel further teaches the readme file … the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose that an amount of time that users of … dwell on … is within a specified range of dwell times. However, this is taught in analogous art, Lai (e.g., [0027], a destination location may be inferred from session logs based at least in part on a user dwell time … a period of time a user dwells on a location presented as part of search query results and selected by a user has been found to be reasonable. For example, without limitation, a threshold time of 100 seconds, as one illustrative example, may be employed; [0075], If a search result click is found whose dwell time is greater than a dwell time threshold (e.g., that is larger than 100 seconds), the location may be treated as a destination location (or a last event) of a search path.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Lai because it can help “locate content of interest,” as suggested by Lai (see [0006]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Loucks et al. (US 20220138792, hereinafter Loucks).
With respect to claim 11, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates , from the data associated with the (e.g., Figs. 14 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document or indicate a minor problem such as a spelling error.) and Sittel further teaches the readme file … the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose that an amount of time that users of … scroll on … is within a specified range of scroll times. However, this is taught in analogous art, Loucks (e.g., [0069], A level of interest may also be associated with a … scrolling time spent on a first webpage or a plurality of webpages of the website … or any other method for determining a level of interest of a user and whether that level of interest exceeds a predetermined threshold level.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Loucks because it can help “provide more contextually relevant information to a user,” as suggested by Loucks (see [0069]).
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith et al. (US 20200133662, hereinafter Smith).
With respect to claim 12, Hirst disclose A method, which is implemented by a computing system (e.g., Fig. 8 and associated text, e.g., [0042] With reference to FIG. 8, an exemplary environment 810 for implementing various aspects of the invention includes a computer 812.), comprises:
extracting features from data associated with an , wherein the features indicate respective attributes of the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0008], software [code] development documentation; [0026], one or more items 120 in a documentation set; [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as … a spelling error … not enough information, and so forth; [0029], Based on feedback received by the analyzer 110, positive and/or corrective commentary can be automatically categorized.) and wherein extracting the features comprises:
automatically learning rules using a natural language processor (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components … For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary [NLP], wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric based upon learning processes applied to training members or data of the attribute's class or topic; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.); and
analyzing the data associated with the , using the natural language processor, to determine the features, which indicate the respective attributes of the , using natural language processing by applying the rules to the data (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components. This may also include artificial intelligence techniques, automated classification methods, inference analysis, probability analysis, statistical processing, and components such as neural networks. For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.), wherein at least a subset of the features indicates that the information in the has at least one usability, a completeness, a correctness, or an ambiguity that is within a specified range of values (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], metrics [features] such as … a spelling error … a code snippet is malfunctioning … not enough information; [0038], FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues … information is incorrect … not enough information; [0028] analyzing quality scores from the scoring component 150 in view of predetermined thresholds [specified range of value] ... Likewise, scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.);
assigning weights to the features (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric.);
generating a quality score for the , the quality score based at least in part on the weights assigned to the features, the quality score representing a quality of the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0027] The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback from users of the documentation set that can be automatically scored or ranked by a scoring component 150 to determine the nature of the problem with the items 120 and to enable automated remedial actions to be taken in order to improve the quality of the documentation set.); and
based at least in part on the weights that are assigned to the features satisfying a designated condition, executing an instruction that causes the to incorporate a revision of the information in the , by at least one of increasing usability, increasing the completeness, increasing the correctness, or decreasing the ambiguity of the information in the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0038], quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues and a graphical depiction of the weighting … of an issue [feature] … These metrics may include … information is incorrect; [0027], metrics such as … a spelling error … not enough information; [0028], scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set; [0010], A rules engine interprets the items in view of one or more quality metrics by applying the metrics to the items in order to determine perceived problems (or benefits) with the items, facilitate remediation of the problems.).
Although Hirst discloses software development documentation (see above), it does not appear to disclose the following, which is taught in analogous art, Smith: onboarding guide that includes information that guides a user of at least one of code or an application programming interface (API) through how to use the at least one of the code or the API … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide, which guides the user of the at least one of the code or the API through how to use the at least one of the code or the API … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide, which guides the user of the at least one of the code or the API through how to use the at least one of the code or the API … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0066], The documentation checker 344 may monitor … source code 310 … to alert a user when documentation should be updated. Documentation may comprise docstrings … Documentation may comprise descriptive text or executable code. Documentation may be stored in the same location as source code 310 or in a different folder of the same project or repository as source code 310; [0101], a database comprising a plurality of code repositories and corresponding content is provided. The corresponding content may comprise documentation of the code repositories such as docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files; [0067], The source code repository may comprise a repository managed by a version control system such as Git, Subversion, or other version control system; see also [0069].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith, such that readme files are updated, because docstring are a ubiquitous piece of source code documentation and also because “it is burdensome for programmers to update the documentation”, as suggested by Smith (see [0004]).
With respect to claim 15, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates explicit feedback regarding the from users of the , from the data associated with the claim 10, the rules include at least one model.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide(e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Monk et al. (US 9678949, hereinafter Monk).
With respect to claim 13, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates using the natural language processing (e.g., Figs. 14 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document; [0030], learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … the onboarding guide … the onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose an extent to which language in … is subjective, by analyzing the data that is included in. However, this is taught in analogous art, Monk (e.g., Fig. 2 and associated text, e.g., col. 30:52-67, risk detection may be performed from lists of commonly known terms that have been identified as being ambiguous or that support many types of ambiguity. These terms may be stored in the Linguistic Repository … This analysis may include identified ambiguous terms such as “user-friendly” or any such representation of this term, “easy”.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Monk because Hirst discloses identifying ambiguity and Monk provides an effective means of identifying ambiguity by storing a list of ambiguous terms, including subjective terms, in a linguistic repository.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Cutts et al. (US 7840572, hereinafter Cutts).
With respect to claim 14, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates from the data associated with the and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … the onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose an amount of time since … was created or updated. However, this is taught in analogous art, Cutts (e.g., col. 6:28-31, the date that a document includes at least a threshold number of pages may be used as an indication of the inception date of the document.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Cutts because it can help identify relevant documents,” as suggested by Cutts (see col. 1:62-63).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Pennock et al. (US 8442984, hereinafter Pennock)
With respect to claim 16, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates that the , from the data associated with the (e.g., Figs. 14 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document; [0030], learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose is empty. However, this is taught in analogous art, Pennock (e.g., col. 3:18-24, While quality factors have been identified for example purposes, other quality factors can be used such as the correctness of the grammar and spelling of the text on the web pages, whether obscene or otherwise inappropriate material is presented, whether the websites have blank or incomplete pages, as well as other factors that would affect the quality of the website.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Pennock because and “advantage realized is the ability to identify quality,” as suggested by Pennock (see col. 1:65-66).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Verstak et al. (US 8095876, hereinafter Verstak).
With respect to claim 17, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates that the , from the data associated with the and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose has a length that is greater than or equal to a length threshold. However, this is taught in analogous art, Verstak (see col. 4:61-col. 5:1, The length measure can be determined by comparing the length of a document version to a minimum length threshold … This minimum length is chosen to prefer full-text document versions … document versions with length longer than the minimum length threshold are deemed full-text versions.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Verstak because “it would be desirable to identify a primary version out of different versions of the same document in a document collection,” as suggested by Verstak (see col. 1:44-46).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Cummaudo et al. “Requirements of API Documentation: A Case Study into Computer Vision Services” (hereinafter Cummaudo).
With respect to claim 18, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates whether the , from the data associated with the of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document; [0030], learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … the onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose includes contact information of a support entity to be contacted for assistance with. However, this is taught in analogous art, Cummaudo (e.g., p. 2, left col., 2nd full para., For each category in our taxonomy, we assess whether the respective service’s documentation contains, partially-contains or does not contain the documentation artefact from our taxonomy, thus determining the extent to which the requirements of good API documentation are met; p. 2, right col., 1st full para., The taxonomy we proposed consists of five key requirements: … Existence of Support Artefacts; p. 8, left col., [D] Existence of Support Artefacts … [D4] Contact for technical support.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the technique of Cummaudo because it can “enhance intelligent software documentation,” as suggested by Cummaudo (see Abstract).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Oikawa (US 20060095841, hereinafter Oikawa).
With respect to claim 19, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates whether the includes that is greater than or equal to a threshold number, from the data associated with the and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose a number of tables. However, this is taught in analogous art, Oikawa (e.g., [0008], Quality metrics for a document may include … number of tables.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Oikawa because “it is desirable to maintain high quality and complete project documentation,” as suggested by Oikawa (see [0002]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Feng et al. (US 20120109974, hereinafter Feng).
With respect to claim 20, Hirst also discloses wherein extracting the features from the data associated with the comprises: extracting a feature, which indicates whether the that is greater than or equal to a threshold number, from the data associated with the and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose includes a number of acronyms. However, this is taught in analogous art, Feng (e.g., [0010], Proposed is a system and method for extracting an acronym and one or more corresponding expansions of the acronym from a document represented in a markup language. In particular, embodiments include: identifying at least one acronym contained in the document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the invention of Feng because “Acronyms present challenges to readers,” as suggested by Feng (see [0002]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith and Sabharwal.
With respect to claim 21, Hirst discloses A computer program product comprising a computer-readable storage medium having instructions recorded thereon for enabling a processor-based system to perform operations, the operations comprising (e.g., Fig. 8 and associated text, e.g., [0045], Computer 812 also includes removable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile computer storage media; claim 18, A computer readable medium having computer readable instructions stored thereon for implementing the quality component, the rules engine, and the scoring component claim 1.), the operations comprising:
extracting features from data associated with an , wherein the features indicate respective attributes of the include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with an] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] such as …a code snippet is malfunctioning … not enough information; [0029], Based on feedback received by the analyzer 110, positive and/or corrective commentary can be automatically categorized.), and wherein extracting the features comprises:
automatically learning rules using a natural language processor (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components … For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary [NLP], wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric based upon learning processes applied to training members or data of the attribute's class or topic; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.); and
analyzing the data associated with the , using the natural language processor, to determine the features, which indicate the respective attributes of the , using natural language processing by applying the rules to the data (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], rules engine can include a plurality of rules for analyzing the quality metrics 140 … models may be applied. Such models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components. This may also include artificial intelligence techniques, automated classification methods, inference analysis, probability analysis, statistical processing, and components such as neural networks. For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; claim 10, the rules include at least one model.), wherein at least a subset of the features indicates that information in the , has at least one of a usability, a completeness, a correctness, or an ambiguity that is within a specified range of values (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0027], metrics [features] such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document … a spelling error … a code snippet is malfunctioning; [0038], FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues … ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording … information is incorrect; [0028] analyzing quality scores from the scoring component 150 in view of predetermined thresholds [specified range of value] ... Likewise, scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.);
assigning weights to the features using a model a key performance indicator associated with the , the key performance indicator specifying an extent to which the satisfies a criterion (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], models can be automatically constructed from learning algorithms or learning components … For example, learning algorithms can include employment of classifiers that are configured to analyze associated attributes of quality terms, metrics, topics, and/or vocabulary, wherein a feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0028], scores [performance indicator] below the threshold [criterion] can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.); and
based at least in part on the weights that are assigned to the features satisfying a designated condition, executing an instruction that causes the to incorporate a revision of the information in the , by at least one of increasing the usability, increasing the completeness, increasing the correctness, or decreasing the ambiguity of the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0030], feature vector assigns a weight or value to the attribute or metric; [0038], quality metrics display 600 … a pie chart 610 illustrates various quality issues and a graphical depiction of the weighting … of an issue [feature] … These metrics may include … information is incorrect; [0027], metrics such as ambiguous, imprecise, or unclear wording in a document … a spelling error; [0028], scores below the threshold can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set; [0010], A rules engine interprets the items in view of one or more quality metrics by applying the metrics to the items in order to determine perceived problems (or benefits) with the items, facilitate remediation of the problems.).
Although Hirst discloses software development documentation (see above), it does not appear to disclose the following, which is taught in analogous art, Smith: onboarding guide that includes information that guides a user of at least one of code or an application programming interface (API) … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide, which guides the user of the at least one of the code or the API through how to use the at least one of the code or the API … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide … onboarding guide, which guides the user of the at least one of the code or the API through how to use the at least one of the code or the API … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0066], programming co-pilot system 340 may include a documentation checker 344. The documentation checker 344 may monitor … source code 310 … to alert a user when documentation should be updated. Documentation may comprise docstrings … Documentation may comprise descriptive text or executable code. Documentation may be stored in the same location as source code 310 or in a different folder of the same project or repository as source code 310; [0101], a database comprising a plurality of code repositories and corresponding content is provided. The corresponding content may comprise documentation of the code repositories such as docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files; [0067], The source code repository may comprise a repository managed by a version control system such as Git, Subversion, or other version control system; see also [0069].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith, such that readme files are updated, because docstring are a ubiquitous piece of source code documentation and also because “it is burdensome for programmers to update the documentation”, as suggested by Smith (see [0004]).
Although Hirst as modifies discloses assigning weights and a key performance indicator associated with the onboarding guide (see above in), it does not appear to disclose based at least in part on. However, this is taught in analogous art, Sabharwal (e.g., Fig. 1 and associated text, e.g., [0027], assigning weights to the one or more features associated with the each of the plurality of performance parameters based on a predefined evaluation criterion. The predefined evaluation criterion may include one or more of complexity of issues, an expertise level and a resolution quality of issues, and wherein high weights are assigned to one or more features from the set of features associated with the complexity of issues, and the resolution quality of issues as compared to the expertise level.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the performance criterion-based weighting invention of Sabharwal because “improving the quality,” is difficult, as suggested by Hirst (see [0006]) and the invention of Sabharwal allows for emphasizing the resolution quality issue, as suggested by Sabharwal (see [0027], “The predefined evaluation criterion may include … resolution quality of issues.”).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith and Sabharwal, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Dean.
With respect to claim 23, Hirst also discloses wherein the criterion requires that an extent to which the scores below the threshold [criterion] can indicate corrective actions that may be similarly distributed in or applied to the documentation set.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose is used by users is greater than or equal to a threshold extent of usage. However, this is taught in analogous art, Dean (e.g., Figs. 4-5 and associated text, e.g., [0010], usage statistics may include … the number of visitors to the document … the frequency with which the document was visited; [0029], a raw count 410, which could be an absolute or relative number corresponding to the visit frequency for the document; [0033] a raw count 510, which could be an absolute or relative number corresponding to the number of users who have visited the document; [0025], scores are assigned to each document based on the usage information … the usage information comprises both unique visitor information and frequency of visit information; [0028], The frequency of visit score equals log 2(1+log(VF)/log(MAXVF). VF is the number of times that the document was visited (or accessed) in one month, and MAXVF is set to 2000 … If the unique user is less than 10, it equals 0.5*UU/10.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the invention of Dean because “there exists … a need to develop other techniques for determining the importance of documents,” as suggested by Dean (see [0004]).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Smith and Sabharwal, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Kania (US 20090288072, hereinafter Kania).
With respect to claim 24, Hirst also discloses the to extract at least one of the features from the data associated with the (e.g., Figs. 1-4 and 6-7 along with associated text, e.g., [0008], software development documentation; [0026], one or more items 120 in a documentation set; [0027], The quality metrics 140 can include combinations of positive and/or corrective feedback [data associated with] from users of the documentation … aggregate comments or selections from users … negative or corrective feedback can include analyzing metrics [features] … metrics 140 can include a bug exists … code snippet is malfunctioning; [0029], Based on feedback received by the analyzer 110, positive and/or corrective commentary can be automatically categorized.) and Smith further teaches onboarding guide … onboarding guide (e.g., Figs 1-8 and associated text, e.g., [0048], Docstrings [onboarding guide] may comprise documentation text … a docstring which explains intended usage of the function and what parameters and return values are associated with the function; [0058], One or more documents related to at least one of the tokens may be retrieved from a database. The documents may comprise docstrings; [0029], a database may comprise storage of files.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Smith for the same reason set forth above.
Although Hirst as modified discloses code that is included in the onboarding guide (see above), it does not appear to disclose executing code that is included in. However, this is taught in analogous art, Kania (e.g., Figs. 2-3 and associated text, e.g., [0023], code samples are extracted from the documentation and moved into a test case dump file, which is executed later via a test framework on the real software and produces an output that is correct or incorrect, depending on whether or not the code samples are error-free. If the test case fails, it means that the documentation contained an error for this test case of this extracted piece of code from the documentation.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the documentation code testing invention of Kania because bugs in documentation code are an important measure of document quality and the invention of Kania “automatically identifies errors in software documentation,” as suggested by Kania (see [0003]).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirst in view of Sittel, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cummaudo et al. “Requirements of API Documentation: A Case Study into Computer Vision Services” (hereinafter Cummaudo).
With respect to claim 25, Hirst also discloses extract a feature, which indicates whether the , from the data associated with the readme file … the readme file … readme file (e.g., Figs. 1-3 and associated text, e.g., [0045], Source code languages include but are not limited to … ISML … source code management is implemented using Git. In another case, Perforce, Subversion or other version control software can be utilized as a repository; [0046], extractor 132 for extracting tagged text, including comments, from the set of code files; [0067], These comments get extracted and put into a readme.txt; see also [0061-62] and [0069].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hirst with the invention of Sittel for the same reason set forth above.
Hirst does not appear to disclose includes contact information of a support entity to be contacted for assistance with. However, this is taught in analogous art, Cummaudo (e.g., p. 2, left col., 2nd full para., For each category in our taxonomy, we assess whether the respective service’s documentation contains, partially-contains or does not contain the documentation artefact from our taxonomy, thus determining the extent to which the requirements of good API documentation are met; p. 2, right col., 1st full para., The taxonomy we proposed consists of five key requirements: … Existence of Support Artefacts; p. 8, left col., [D] Existence of Support Artefacts … [D4] Contact for technical support.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the documentation quality improvement invention of Hirst with the technique of Cummaudo because it can “enhance intelligent software documentation,” as suggested by Cummaudo (see Abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, Braz et al. US 20210240471 teaches updating readme files for a source code of a machine learning model.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN DAVID BERMAN whose telephone number is (571) 272-7206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6 Eastern.
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, Hyung S. Sough can be reached on 571-272-6799. 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.
/STEPHEN D BERMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2192
Prosecution Insights