DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to Request for Continued Examination filed on March 2nd, 2026. Claims 1, 15, 18 and 20 are amended, claims 13 and 14 are cancelled. Claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 15-21 are pending and have been examined.
Any previous objections/rejections not mentioned in this Office Action have been withdrawn by the examiner.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 3rd, 2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments and Arguments
Regarding rejections made under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant argues, “Riguerra, however, does not describe displaying an alternative planned operation that displays the changed component requested by the subsequent interactive input simultaneously with the initial planned operation in response to receiving in response to receiving a subsequent interactive input that requests a change to a component of the initial planned operation,” (page 9 of Applicant’s Remarks).
Applicant’s arguments are moot because new grounds of rejection are raised in view of European Patent Application 2293203 to Zhou et al. Further details are provided below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 7, 912, 15-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0095840 to Riguerra Arias et al. (hereinafter, "Riguerra") in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2005/0093881 to Okita et al. (hereinafter, “Okita”), and further in view of European Patent Application EP 2293203 to Zhou et al. (hereinafter, “Zhou”).
Regarding claims 1 and 18, Riguerra teaches a method and system comprising: generating and displaying an aggregated assistant interface using a processor system; and receiving an input from a user using the processor system, wherein the aggregated assistant interface displays one or more planned operations in response to receiving an initial input from the user and is configured to receive one or more interactive inputs configured to interact with the planned operations, the one or more interactive inputs including a reference to components of the aggregated assistant interface in conversation to modify the one or more planned operations (paragraph [0005], "According to one embodiment, the invention relates to a system that implements a framework that connects a plurality of complex forecasting components… a plurality of agents, where each agent represents a connector that enables communication between each forecasting component and the framework; a plurality of composite agents, where each agent represents a process to run a combination of agents, decisions, calculations, interaction with external systems or logic; an application programming interface that allows control for one or more operations performed by the forecasting components; and a user interface that provides access control for one or more operations performed by the forecasting components." and paragraph [0091], "A user interface may be in the form of a dialogue screen provided by an app, for example. A user interface may also include any of touch screen, keyboard, voice reader, voice recognizer, dialogue screen, menu box, list, checkbox, toggle switch, a pushbutton, a virtual environment (e.g., Virtual Machine (VM)/cloud), or any other device that allows a user to receive information regarding the operation of the processor as it processes a set of instructions and/or provide the processor with information. Accordingly, the user interface may be any system that provides communication between a user and a processor. The information provided by the user to the processor through the user interface may be in the form of a command, a selection of data, or some other input, for example."),wherein the system can select different display modes including a state view display mode and plan view display mode (paragraph [0065], "The Graphical User Interface may enable a user to monitor and browse available forecast runs. Other operations may include: view the runs that are in progress and finished; view run parameters and milestone messages, view notifications, access to the result datasets and logs, view audit trail, export configuration, create new forecast using an existing one as template."),wherein the state view display mode displays a view of an evolution of a memory as the processor system controls the individual agents to execute the planned operations (paragraph [0066], "With the Graphical User Interface, users may manage the contents of the Data Store. Other operations may include: browse contents of the Data Store, view the history and audit trail of each dataset and metadata, browse metadata, modifications of the metadata, copy input datasets, and other actions supported by the Data Store.").
Riguerra does not explicitly teach a method or system “wherein the plan view display mode displays a plurality of different one or more planned operations in response to the initial input, each of the planned operations including a plurality of steps for performing a task corresponding to the initial input, and display an indicator associated with a given agent among the individual agents that indicates a status of an ongoing execution of the given agent while performing the planned operation,” and thus, Okita is introduced.
Okita teaches the plan view display mode displays a plurality of different one or more planned operations in response to the initial input, each of the planned operations including a plurality of steps for performing a task corresponding to the initial input, and display an indicator associated with a given agent among the individual agents that indicates a status of an ongoing execution of the given agent while performing the planned operation (paragraph [0071], "Another benefit of the present invention is that it can facilitate real-time management and analysis by tracking and displaying statistical information. To facilitate real-time management and analysis, the execution of workflows is instrumented to collect step execution information. The collected statistics may be made available through an RPC interface. The workflow and consolidation period should be specified through this interface. This feature facilitates monitoring, performance tuning, problem identification, debugging of workflows, and diagnostics in a workflow system.").
Riguerra and Okita are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra with the teachings of Okita for the purpose of improving task information communication. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
While Riguerra figures 5 and 6 show an editable user interface, and Okita paragraph [0075] describes a workflow editor that includes overlay data for comparison between different workflows, the combination of Riguerra and Okita does not explicitly describe “the one or more planned operation includes an initial planned operation displayed by the aggregated assistant interface in response to receiving an initial interactive input and an alternative planned operation that is displayed by the aggregated assistant interface simultaneously with the initial planned operation in response to receiving a subsequent interactive input that requests a change to a component of the initial planned operation, the alternative planned operation displaying the changed component requested by the subsequent interactive input,” and thus, Zhou is introduced.
Zhou teaches a method and system for modifying process control data wherein the one or more planned operation includes an initial planned operation displayed by the aggregated assistant interface in response to receiving an initial interactive input and an alternative planned operation that is displayed by the aggregated assistant interface simultaneously with the initial planned operation in response to receiving a subsequent interactive input that requests a change to a component of the initial planned operation, the alternative planned operation displaying the changed component requested by the subsequent interactive input (paragraph [0092], "The multiple attribute editor interface 1100 is also configured to display a plurality of feedback graphical effects associated with modifying the control process data. For example, to indicate that a control process data value is editable or modifiable, a data cell may include highlighted text 1114 or a cursor 1116 when the data cell is selected. To indicate that the process control data in a data cell has been modified but not committed, persisted, or otherwise saved, the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 may change a data cell border characteristic by, for example, adding a border highlight 1118. Additionally or alternatively, the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 may show a pen icon 1120 adjacent to a modified process control data value.").
By teaching a system where user-provided edits are held and shown in the editor before the changes are committed, or saved, Zhou describes a system that reads on the broadest reasonable interpretation of a system that shows an initial planned operation and an alternative planned operation simultaneously. A user of Zhou’s editor could make changes to a planned process, have those changes visualized, and easily revert the changes to return to the initial process state, providing substantially the same outcome as the claimed invention.
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra and Okita with the teachings of Zhou for the purpose of improving user experience. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claims 2 and 19, Riguerra further teaches a method and system wherein the aggregated assistant interface includes a plurality of individual agents configured to perform respective atomic functions (paragraph [0061], "The forecasting processes in Composite Agents may be used to manage series of more granular interrelated forecasting tasks. The process tasks may include various combinations of actions such as execution of other agents or forecasting components, calculations, interaction with systems (inside or outside the framework), conditional branching, parallelization, flow control, notifications, and others.").
Regarding claim 3, Riguerra further teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the respective atomic functions of each of the individual agents are different from one another (paragraph [0020], "The Framework may represent an apparatus or system that connects a multiplicity of potentially very complex business models and data processing components, each of which produce different types of information related to financial forecasts, while maintaining a distributed and federated model to allow high autonomy to each component.").
Regarding claim 7, Riguerra further teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the view of the evolution includes a global context as shared by the plurality of individual agents (paragraph [0049], "With a Pluggable extensions module, new modules may be created by following a standardized interface that receives. Any generic specification format may be linked as metadata of the dataset or the dataset type, and kept in the Data Store or other location. A Validation Engine may implement a standard interface that receives the dataset to be validated, applicable specification and an execution context that provides the connectivity to the Framework system. The engine may run the validations against the dataset, retrieve additional data and metadata if required by using the context, and further return the validation report.").
Regarding claim 9, Riguerra further teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the interactive input is configured to select a preferred planned operation to perform the task or an alternative planned operation to avoid a potential failure in performing the task (paragraph [0072], "FIG. 3 is an exemplary illustration of configuring and running a forecast component, according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 3 illustrates a calculator flow. FIG. 3 illustrates interactions between and among User 310, Web Controller 312, Flight Control 314, Data Store 316, Agent Daemon 318 and Agent Calculator Runner 320. At 322, the user may log in the web controller. At 324, the user may select a calculator to run. At 326, the user may select an exercise and scenario. At 328, the user may select values for parameters.").
Regarding claim 10, Riguerra does not explicitly teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the aggregated assistant interface displays a graphic identifier with the one or more of the planned operations to indicate differences among the one or more planned operations,” however, Okita teaches the aggregated assistant interface displays a graphic identifier with the one or more of the planned operations to indicate differences among the one or more planned operations (paragraph [0077], "In addition to displaying numerical values for the statistics, the information can also be displayed in other ways. For example, different color schemes may be used to highlight different bounds or ranges of overlay data. In this case the Editor maintains specifications for highlighting the overlay data with different colors, so that abnormally large/low values or other data ranges can be visually flagged in different ways." See also, Zhou paragraphs [0092]-[0095], “The multiple attribute editor interface 1100 is also configured to display a plurality of feedback graphical effects associated with modifying the control process data. For example, to indicate that a control process data value is editable or modifiable, a data cell may include highlighted text 1114 or a cursor 1116 when the data cell is selected… To show error feedback, the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 is configured to display error feedback graphical effects… The multiple attribute editor interface 1100 may also display the error feedback graphical effects 1124, 1126, 1128, or any other suitable effect to indicate a detection that a modified process control data value has been modified substantially simultaneously by at least two users.”).
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra with the teachings of Okita or Zhou for the purpose of improving task information communication. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 11, Okita further teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein the status of execution of a given planned operation among the one or more planned operations is overlaid on the steps (paragraph [0075], "As mentioned above, the present invention is capable of displaying statistical information relating to a workflow in real-time. In one embodiment, the information that is desired to be displayed is overlaid on top of a workflow diagram displayed on the workflow editor.").
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra and Zhou with the teachings of Okita for the purpose of improving task information communication. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 12, Riguerra does not explicitly teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 11, wherein the aggregated assistant interface overlays an inventory of data stored in memory in response to selecting a given step included in the plan,” however, Okita teaches the aggregated assistant interface overlays an inventory of data stored in memory in response to selecting a given step included in the plan (paragraph [0080], "The overlay data provider is capable of extracting the statistical data, and based on the metrics shown above from the workflow server engine, perform the required calculations and modifications on the data in order to provide the desired data to the editor using the overlay interface.").
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra and Zhou with the teachings of Okita for the purpose of improving task information communication. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 15, Riguerra further teaches The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein modifying the planned operation include one or all of adding a step to the plan operation, deleting a step from the planned operation, and editing a step included in the planned operation (paragraph [0063], "The forecasting process may be dynamically amended during the execution of each of its instances based on input parameters, configuration, interaction with other framework components, automatic discovery of task dependencies, or in general any other data source. Amendments may include adding or removing tasks, modifying task dependencies, modifying data.").
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Riguerra and Okita does not teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the one or more interactive inputs confirms the modified planned operation, and wherein confirming the modified planned operation stores the planned operation in memory for future use,” however, Zhou teaches one or more interactive inputs confirms the modified planned operation, and wherein confirming the modified planned operation stores the planned operation in memory for future use (paragraph [0097], "FIGS. 12A-14C illustrate a plurality of display feedback effects associated with modifying and persisting, committing, or otherwise saving modified process control data values via a multiple attribute editor interface (e.g., the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 of FIGS. 11A and 11B). The in-place editor 226 (FIG. 2) may save modified process control data values based on any of a plurality of user interface interactions associated with the multiple attribute editor interface 1100. For example, a user may select the commit button 1122 (FIG. 11B) to save the modified data values.").
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra and Okita with the teachings of Zhou for the purpose of improving task management system usability. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 20, Riguerra teaches A computer program product to operate processing system to control an aggregated assistant interface, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith (paragraph [0086], "As described above, the various embodiments of the present invention support a number of communication devices and components, each of which may include at least one programmed processor and at least one memory or storage device. The memory may store a set of instructions."), the program instructions executable by an electronic computer processor to control the processing system to perform operations comprising:generate and display the aggregated assistant interface (paragraph [0005], "According to one embodiment, the invention relates to a system that implements a framework that connects a plurality of complex forecasting components… and a user interface that provides access control for one or more operations performed by the forecasting components.");receive an input from a user (paragraph [0028], "The Framework may allow the user to select parameters and datasets that are validated, and further allow combinations that are consistent with the forecast."); anddisplay, on the aggregated assistant interface, one or more planned operations in response to receiving an initial input from the user and is configured to receive one or more interactive inputs configured to interact with the planned operations, wherein the aggregated assistant interface includes a plurality of individual agents configured to perform respective atomic functions (paragraph [0066], "With the Graphical User Interface, users may manage the contents of the Data Store. Other operations may include: browse contents of the Data Store, view the history and audit trail of each dataset and metadata, browse metadata, modifications of the metadata, copy input datasets, and other actions supported by the Data Store. Users may also manage the configuration, rules, process, permissions, resource allocation and other parameters associated to agents and/or composite agents via the Graphical User Interface," and paragraph [0061], "The forecasting processes in Composite Agents may be used to manage series of more granular interrelated forecasting tasks."),wherein the system can select different display modes including a state view display mode and plan view display mode (paragraph [0065], "The Graphical User Interface may enable a user to monitor and browse available forecast runs. Other operations may include: view the runs that are in progress and finished; view run parameters and milestone messages, view notifications, access to the result datasets and logs, view audit trail, export configuration, create new forecast using an existing one as template."),wherein the state view display mode displays a view of an evolution of a memory as the processor system controls the individual agents to execute the planned operations (paragraph [0066], "With the Graphical User Interface, users may manage the contents of the Data Store. Other operations may include: browse contents of the Data Store, view the history and audit trail of each dataset and metadata, browse metadata, modifications of the metadata, copy input datasets, and other actions supported by the Data Store.")
Riguerra does not explicitly teach “wherein the plan view display mode displays a plurality of different one or more planned operations in response to the initial input, each of the planned operations including a plurality of steps for performing a task corresponding to the initial input, and display an indicator associated with a given agent among the individual agents that indicates a status of an ongoing execution of the given agent while performing the planned operation,” however, Okita teaches the plan view display mode displays a plurality of different one or more planned operations in response to the initial input, each of the planned operations including a plurality of steps for performing a task corresponding to the initial input, and display an indicator associated with a given agent among the individual agents that indicates a status of an ongoing execution of the given agent while performing the planned operation (paragraph [0071], "Another benefit of the present invention is that it can facilitate real-time management and analysis by tracking and displaying statistical information. To facilitate real-time management and analysis, the execution of workflows is instrumented to collect step execution information. The collected statistics may be made available through an RPC interface. The workflow and consolidation period should be specified through this interface. This feature facilitates monitoring, performance tuning, problem identification, debugging of workflows, and diagnostics in a workflow system.").
Riguerra and Okita are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra with the teachings of Okita for the purpose of improving task information communication. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
As in claim 1, the combination of Riguerra and Okita does not explicitly describe “the one or more planned operation includes an initial planned operation displayed by the aggregated assistant interface in response to receiving an initial interactive input and an alternative planned operation that is displayed by the aggregated assistant interface simultaneously with the initial planned operation in response to receiving a subsequent interactive input that requests a change to a component of the initial planned operation, the alternative planned operation displaying the changed component requested by the subsequent interactive input,” however, Zhou teaches a method and system for modifying process control data wherein the one or more planned operation includes an initial planned operation displayed by the aggregated assistant interface in response to receiving an initial interactive input and an alternative planned operation that is displayed by the aggregated assistant interface simultaneously with the initial planned operation in response to receiving a subsequent interactive input that requests a change to a component of the initial planned operation, the alternative planned operation displaying the changed component requested by the subsequent interactive input (paragraph [0092], "The multiple attribute editor interface 1100 is also configured to display a plurality of feedback graphical effects associated with modifying the control process data. For example, to indicate that a control process data value is editable or modifiable, a data cell may include highlighted text 1114 or a cursor 1116 when the data cell is selected. To indicate that the process control data in a data cell has been modified but not committed, persisted, or otherwise saved, the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 may change a data cell border characteristic by, for example, adding a border highlight 1118. Additionally or alternatively, the multiple attribute editor interface 1100 may show a pen icon 1120 adjacent to a modified process control data value.").
Riguerra, Okita and Zhou are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra and Okita with the teachings of Zhou for the purpose of improving user experience. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Claims 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riguerra, Okita and Zhou as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0406808 to Kryzak et al. (hereinafter, "Kryzak").
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Riguerra, Okita and Zhou does not teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 16, wherein the user interaction with the interface is stored to manifest in future planned behaviors,” and thus, Kryzak is introduced.
Kryzak teaches the user interaction with the interface is stored to manifest in future planned behaviors (paragraph [0057], "Interaction Management—Mechanism used to store behaviors about individuals with the purpose of using the data as a future predictor.").
Riguerra, Okita, Zhou and Kryzak are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra, Okita and Zhou with the teachings of Kryzak for the purpose of improving task management efficiency. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Riguerra, Okita and Zhou does not teach “The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the one or more interactive inputs are continuously monitored over time, and wherein the processor system learns a behavior patterns of the user based on the monitored interactive inputs and determines future planned operations based the learned behavior of the user,” however, Kryzak teaches the one or more interactive inputs are continuously monitored over time, and wherein the processor system learns a behavior patterns of the user based on the monitored interactive inputs and determines future planned operations based the learned behavior of the user (paragraph [0057], "Interaction Management—Mechanism used to store behaviors about individuals with the purpose of using the data as a future predictor," and paragraph [0102], "Further, structural diagrams of Tackles, Plans, Items and Edges, can be coupled with Interaction Diagram protocols and data, to generate past and current analytics, and project future analytics in the form of statistics. Preferably, a predictive algorithm based on User history and Project History, is used to generate future analytics in the form of projected statistics.").
Riguerra, Okita, Zhou and Kryzak are considered analogous because they are each concerned with task management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Riguerra, Okita and Zhou with the teachings of Kryzak for the purpose of improving task management efficiency. Given that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent 9,396307 to Hawkins et al.
U.S. Patent 10,942,625 to Li et al.
U.S. Patent 11,875,189 to Wellum et al.
U.S. Patent 12,002,012 to Encarnación er al.
U.S. Patent 12,020,046 to Nychis et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0229313 to Motoyama et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0327942 to Eldridge et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2011/0145031 to Basu et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0253455 to Mauro et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0343090 to Wood et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0137105 to Kortenkamp et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0012198 to Ni et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0089860 to Heere et al.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0071362 to Sreedharan et al.
China Invention Application 109901896 to Li et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN T SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-6643. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, PIERRE-LOUIS DESIR can be reached at (571) 272-7799. 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.
/SEAN THOMAS SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2659
/PIERRE LOUIS DESIR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2659
Prosecution Insights