DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 24 June 2026 has been entered.
This is a non-final Office Action in response to the request for continued examination dated 24 June 2026.
Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 15, 18, 19 and 20 have been received and are acknowledged.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 24 June 2026 includes a typographical error identifying the 11/3/2020 application by Kesarwani et al. As such the reference has been crossed out and not considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicant: (1) Generally asserts (i.e. without citation) a “specific problem” and a “specific solution.” (Applicant’s response, 9). Applicant argues the previous Office Action “only.. could label an abstract concepts are the high-level concepts of bill presentment or bill payment. (Applicant’s response, 10). Applicant then lists what is included in the “specific computing system and communication limitations,” “ specific data structure and interface limitations, “ and “ specific operation and interaction limitations.” (Applicant’s response 10-11) Applicant argues “… Claims 1-20 recite specific technological implementations of computerized billing access, review, and payment operations utilizing a social messaging system. … do not monopolize the activity of bill payment, bill presentment, or messaging…go further by specifying specific technological improvements in computerized messaging and billing system interactions including specific, non-conventional constraints on how network-integrated computing systems operate to manage, route, match, retrieve, and present billing data through a social messaging environment while bypassing direct consumer-device interaction with external biller and financial institution systems…” (Applicant’s response 11)
(2) Applicant asserts that the rejection is “erroneous” and “…engages in a three-step process to misinterpret the claims relative to 35 USC 101….” and describes three ‘steps’ that the previous Office Action did “improperly”, “ erroneously” and “inaccurately.” (Applicant’s response 11) Applicant further argues that this “three-step” process “misinterprets and misapplies the 35 USC 101 case and the MPEP…” and that the
“….rejection is based on the false premise that all of the specified operation and interaction limitations, devoid of the specific communication architecture limitations, interface limitations, distributed server/network limitations, application programming interface limitations, and messaging system interactions, are an abstract idea when, in fact, the only abstract concept is at a higher conceptual level, e.g., bill presentment or bill paying…Following the intent of 35 U.S.C. § 101, case law, and MPEP guidance, reading the claims as a whole (i.e., without dissection and out of context misinterpretation) as one of ordinary skill applying semantics, the evaluation procedure would end at step 2a.1 because the claims clearly recite a practical application of accessing bills while bypassing billers and financial institutions, by using the specified technological improvements. …the claims recite a specific technological implementation involving:
" a network integrator interface;
" a social messaging system;
" distributed communication across separate network infrastructures;
" matching operations between authentication or transaction data and billing data;
" application programming interface interactions;
. retrieval operations involving network aggregator systems;
. message-based billing data presentation; and
" bypassing of direct communication pathways between the consumer computing
device and biller and financial institution systems. (Applicant’s response, 13-14)
(3) Applicant also asserts that the:
“…claims recite a specific technological solution rooted in computer networking and distributed communication architecture that modifies how consumer computing devices interact with billing and payment systems… recite specific technological improvements involving reduced network interactions, reduced authentication overhead, reduced credential management operations, reduced duplicated account-access operations, reduced communication pathways, and improved integration between messaging systems and billing/payment systems….improves the technical fields of computerized billing access and messaging system integration by repurposing and adapting a social messaging environment…claims are not directed to a mental process. The claimed invention cannot practically be performed mentally because the claims require operation through distributed computer networks, social messaging systems, network integrator interfaces, network aggregator systems, application programming interfaces, and electronically communicated billing data associated with external biller systems and financial institutions….claimed invention is rooted in computer technology to overcome problems specifically arising in the realm of computer networks and distributed computerized billing systems. The claims are directed to a technological solution arising from the structure and operation of computerized network environments….” (Applicant’s response, 14-15) (referencing DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2014))
(4) Applicant then concludes:
“… one of ordinary skill would immediately recognize that the claimed interface architecture improves computer functionality by changing how computing devices access and retrieve billing information across distributed network systems.
Thus, reading the claims as a whole, the claims clearly recite a practical application that improves computerized messaging and billing system technology through a specific technological implementation involving distributed network communication architectures, messaging-system integration, interface operations, and communication-pathway bypass functionality…”(Applicant’s response, 15)
Examiner respectfully disagrees as noted previously. Examiner notes the rejections outline Steps 1, 2a Prong 1 and Prong 2, and 2b as required by the Alice test. As noted in the rejection below and previously, Applicant’s own Specification describes the invention as “a method of bill presentment” (Specification, [3]). The amended claims also recite “billing.” Applicant’s own arguments characterize the claims as solving a problem in “billing and payment processing” using technology. “Billing” and “payment processing” are clearly a commercial or legal interaction. As such, the claims are categorized as methods of organizing human activity [organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The computing device, processor, memory, display, network integrator interface and social messaging system in each step is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic computer components performing a generic computer function of receiving and transmitting billing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. No improvement to technology is recited. At most, this is a use of technology and is apply-it (See MPEP 2106.05(f) (2) … Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207(Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744,1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
Additionally the recited claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using a computing device, processor, memory, display, network integrator interface and social messaging system to perform the receiving, matching and providing steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. (See also MPEP 2106.05 (a) (I) Improvements to computer functionality. Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to computer functionality: … ii. Accelerating a process of analyzing audit log data when the increased speed comes solely from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer, FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296(Fed. Cir. 2016); iii. Mere automation of manual processes, such as using a generic computer to process an application for financing a purchase, Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, 859 F.3d 1044, 1055, 123 USPQ2d 1100, 1108-09(Fed. Cir. 2017) or speeding up a loan-application process by enabling borrowers to avoid physically going to or calling each lender and filling out a loan application, LendingTree, LLC v. Zillow, Inc., 656 Fed. App'x 991, 996-97 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (non-precedential);… v. Affixing a barcode to a mail object in order to more reliably identify the sender and speed up mail processing, without any limitations specifying the technical details of the barcode or how it is generated or processed, Secured Mail Solutions, LLC v. Universal Wilde, Inc., 873 F.3d 905, 910-11, 124 USPQ2d 1502, 1505-06 (Fed. Cir. 2017); vi. Instructions to display two sets of information on a computer display in a non-interfering manner, without any limitations specifying how to achieve the desired result, Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc., 896 F.3d 1335, 1344-45, 127 USPQ2d 1553, 1559-60 (Fed. Cir. 2018))
Therefore, the exemplary Claim 1 is not patent eligible; independent claims 10 and 20 are also similarly not patent eligible. Further, as previously stated, matters of novelty are discussed are handled under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103, not 35 U.S.C. 101. A novel abstract idea is still an abstract idea. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. All dependent claims can be addressed with the same rationale. (Applicant’s arguments 1-4)
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In particular, Claims 1, 2, 7 , 8 10, 11, 15, 18, 19 and 20 recite
“social messaging system.” The specification uses the terms “digital messaging system, ” “messaging application,” “messaging system” ( See Specification generally [3-5, 14-16, 18-25, 28, 30, 33, 36, and 38) and “mobile messaging application (i.e. “messaging app”) (See at least Specification [14]). No disclosure or description of “social messaging system” has been provided.
Additionally, Claims 1, 10 and 20 recite “… bypassing communication between the computing device and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the computing device and a financial institution associated with the consumer…”
Applicant is requested to provide reference from the original disclosure to support the amendment of "“social messaging system” and “ bypassing communication between the computing device and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the computing device and a financial institution associated with the consumer.” Examiner will interpret as “messaging system” and “… bypass financial institutions or biller entities (e.g. websites and applications (“apps”) thereof)…” (Specification [13]) as disclosed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (1) it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, (2a) it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so (2b), it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Examples of abstract ideas include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. ____ (2014).
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. In the instant case, the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
(1) In the instant case, the claims are directed towards a method, non-transitory computer readable medium, and the system of bill presentment (Specification, [3]) . In the instant case, Claims 1-9 are directed to a process. Claims10-19 are directed to a system. Claims 19-20 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium.
(2a) Prong 1: Bill presentment is categorized in/akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity [organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)]. As such, the claims include an abstract idea.
The specific limitations of the invention are (a) identified to encompass the abstract idea include:
(Currently Amended) A method comprising:
providing … communicatively coupled to a social … accessible by a … used by a consumer;
…, …, authentication or transaction data associated with the consumer via the social … accessed by the …;
matching, …, the authentication or transaction data with the billing data of one or more biller entities associated with the consumer; and
providing, …, the billing data to the … via the social …, bypassing communication between … and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the … and a financial institution associated with the consumer..
10. (Currently Amended) A computer system, comprising:
…
… comprising:
providing … communicatively coupled to a social … accessible by a … used by a consumer;
… authentication or transaction data associated with the consumer via the social … accessed by the computing device;
matching the authentication or transaction data with the billing data of one or more biller entities associated with the consumer; and
providing the billing data to the consumer…social …, bypassing communication between the computing device and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the and a financial institution associated with the consumer.
20. (Currently Amended) A … to:
provide a … communicatively coupled to a social … used by a consumer;
… authentication or transaction data associated with the consumer via the …;
match the authentication or transaction data with the billing data of one or more biller entities associated with the consumer; and
provide the billing data to the consumer …social …,, bypassing communication between the computing device and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the computing device and a financial institution associated with the consumer.
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the (b) subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity .
Prong 2: When considered individually and in combination, the instant claims are do not integrate the exception into a practical application because the steps of providing… matching… providing ….- do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. the abstract idea).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e. providing.. [displaying]….receiving…, providing [ displaying]…) do not improve the functioning of the computer or improve another technology or technical field nor do they recite meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g)) Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
(2b) In the instant case, Claims 1-9 are directed to a process. Claims10-19 are directed to a system. Claims 19-20 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium.
Additionally, the claims (independent and dependent) do not include additional elements that individually or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception of abstract idea (i.e. provide an inventive concept). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of: (computing device, processor, memory, display and network integrator interface ) merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) (SPECIFICATION, [18-19] Fig.1; [20- 23] electronic device 110 (i.e., computing device may include any mobile computer device and/or phone or other computing device…a laptop computer, a hand-held computer, phone, or tablet, etc. In various implementations, the electronic device may include one or more processors, memory, and a display for a consumer 102
to interact with the messaging system 120 and the network integrator interface…messaging system )
The dependent claims have also been examined and do not correct the deficiencies of the independent claims.
It is noted that claims 2-9 and 11-19 introduce the additional element of further steps: providing…(Claims 2, 11 ); providing… ( Claims 3, 12); providing… retrieving… transmitting… (Claims 8 , 17 ); receiving… displaying.. (Claims 9, 18) and wherein clauses further defining elements: network integrator interface, (Claims 4, 5, 7, 13, 14, 15); …data… ( Claims 6, 16 )… computer system… coupled with… biller systems (Claim 19) ; These elements are not a practical application of the judicial exception because the limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g)) Further these limitations taken alone or in combination with the abstract do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea alone because these elements amount to mere use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) (SPECIFICATION, [18-19] Fig.1; [20- 23] electronic device 110 (i.e., computing device may include any mobile computer device and/or phone or other computing device…a laptop computer, a hand-held computer, phone, or tablet, etc. In various implementations, the electronic device may include one or more processors, memory, and a display for a consumer 102
to interact with the messaging system 120 and the network integrator interface…messaging system )
Therefore, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) being anticipated by US 20130346302 A1, Purves et al. hereinafter referred to Purves.
Claims 1, 10 and 20
Purves discloses a method, system and non-transitory computer readable medium comprising:
providing a network integrator interface communicatively coupled to a social messaging system accessible by a computing device used by a consumer; (See at least Purves, Abstract, remote bill payment system, Fig. 13B, [19] Fig. 13A-B features of virtual wallet in some embodiments of Bill Pay; Fig. 107 – Social Media Widget Integration…[172] social integration.. )
receiving, by the network integrator interface, authentication or transaction data associated with the consumer via the social messaging system accessed by the computing device; (See at least Purves, Abstract, remote bill payment system, Fig. 13B, [19] Fig. 13A-B features of virtual wallet in some embodiments of Bill Pay [208-209] VerifyChat feature)
matching, by the network integrator interface, the authentication or transaction data with the billing data of one or more biller entities associated with the consumer; and)(See at least Purves, [295]Bill pay server… matching the provided user authentication information…[649] matching primary keys… )
providing, by the network integrator interface, the billing data to the r computing device via the social messaging system, bypassing communication between the computing device and the one or more biller entities and bypassing communication between the computing device and a financial institution associated with the consumer.. (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; [119-120] retrieve bill information… bill information… [144] may send … bill information …. [175-177] social pay)
Claims 2 and 11
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
providing, by the network integrator interface, payment transaction authorization data to the social messaging system or the one or more billing systems, wherein the payment transaction authorization data comprises data associated with payment authorization or a scheduled date for payment. (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
Claims 3 and 12
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
in response to payment transaction or scheduling confirmation data received, providing, by the network integrator interface, confirmation of payment or scheduled payment to the consumer. (See at least Purves [244] payment confirmation.. [311] .. confirmation that the order has been processed)
Claims 4 and 19
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein the network integrator interface comprises a messaging interface integrated within the social messaging application. (See at least Purves, Abstract, remote bill payment system, Fig. 13B, [19] Fig. 13A-B features of virtual wallet in some embodiments of Bill Pay [208] Facebook messages…)
Claims 5 and 14
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 4 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein the network integrator interface is a natural language interface configured for at least one of consumer authentication and bill presentment. (See at least Purves, [208] VerifyChat… text chat.. )
Claims 6 and 16
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein the authentication or transaction data comprises card number data, expiry date data, name data, account number data, bill transaction data, consumer personal data, or combinations thereof. (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
Claims 7 and 15
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein the network integrator interface is accessed from one or more first servers or networks, and wherein the social messaging system is accessed from one or more second servers or networks.. (See at least Purves [118] servers, [620] servers)
Claims 8 and 17
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein matching the authentication or transaction data of the consumer with the billing data comprises:
providing, by one or more application programming interfaces transmitted by a network aggregator system, the authentication or transaction data to the one or more biller systems; (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
retrieving, by the one or more application programming interfaces from the one or more biller systems or the network aggregator system, the billing data corresponding to the consumer; and (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
transmitting the billing data to the network integrator interface. (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
Claims 9 and 18
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein providing the billing data to the consumer comprises:
receiving, at the network integrator interface, the billing data from a network aggregator system, and (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
displaying, by the network integrator interface using the social messaging system accessed on the computing device, the billing data retrieved at the computing device.. (See at least Purves Fig. 3B 3 68, retrieve bill information; Fig. 1019A payment information, ..credit card info. … billing address… [119-121] retrieve bill information… bill information…payment authorization..[172] social integration… [175-177] social pay)
. Claim 13
Purves discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 10.
Purves further discloses:
wherein the network integrator interface comprises a chatbot. (See at least Purves, Abstract, remote bill payment system, Fig. 13B, [19] Fig. 13A-B features of virtual wallet in some embodiments of Bill Pay [208-209] VerifyChat feature)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHA PUTTAIA H whose telephone number is (571)270-1352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am to 5:30 pm.
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, Abhishek Vyas can be reached on 571-270-1836. 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.
/ASHA PUTTAIA H/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691
Prosecution Insights