DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 5, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1 – 2, 12 – 13, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240).
Regarding Claim 1, Colenbrander teaches a computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), comprising:
a communication module (Figure 1, Element 122, Sub-Element not shown, but is the part connected to the network (Element 116). Paragraph 38) configured to communicate with one or more remote services (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 36) to receive content;
a display module (Figure 1, Element 128. Paragraph 38) configured to display the content to a user (Figure 1, Element 118. Paragraph 38);
a user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) that includes one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) corresponding to the content received from a given one of the remote services (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 36); and
a processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) having one or more processors operatively coupled to the communication module (Figure 1, Element 122, Sub-Element not shown, but is the part connected to the network (Element 116). Paragraph 38), the display module (Figure 1, Element 128. Paragraph 38) and the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38), the processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) being configured to:
associate a given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) with a specific element of the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38);
identify selection (Paragraph 77) of the given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48); and
in response to the identified selection (Paragraph 77) of the given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48), prioritize computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) for interaction with the content over one or more other functions performed by the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) including at least one of a processor, a core, a thread (Paragraphs 102 - 103) or buffer memory (Paragraphs 102 - 103) of the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38).
Regarding Claim 2, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 1 (See Above), wherein upon identification of the selection (Paragraph 77) of the given customizable feature (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48), the processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) is configured to prioritize the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) by being configured to dedicate (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) additional computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) to the content or remove (Figure 2, Element 208. Paragraph 47) one or more of the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) from handling the one or more other functions.
Regarding Claim 12, Colenbrander teaches a method comprising:
associating a given one of one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) with specific element of a user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) of a computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38);
receiving, by the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), content from a remote service (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 36);
identifying, by one or more processors of the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), selection (Paragraph 77) of the given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48); and
in response to identifying the selection (Paragraph 77), prioritizing computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) for interaction with the content over one or more other functions performed by the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38).
Regarding Claim 13, Colenbrander teaches the method of claim 12 (See Above), wherein prioritizing the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) for the interaction with the content includes dedicating additional computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) to the content.
Regarding Claim 21, Colenbrander teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having instructions stored thereon, the instructions, when executed by one or more processors of a computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), implement a method comprising:
associating a given one of one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) with specific element of a user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) of a computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38);
receiving, by the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38), content from a remote service (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 36);
identifying selection (Paragraph 77) of the given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48); and
in response to identifying the selection (Paragraph 77) of the given one of the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48), prioritizing computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) for interaction with the content over one or more other functions performed by the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3 – 5 and 14 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240) in view of Dresti et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2003/0103088).
Regarding Claim 3, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 2 (See Above), wherein the processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) is configured to remove (Figure 2, Element 208. Paragraph 47) the one or more of the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) from handling the one or more other functions.
Colenbrander is silent with regards to remove the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to power down a hardware component of the computing device.
Dresti et al. teach to remove the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to power down a hardware component (Paragraph 306. Dresti et al. discloses “Since the remote control application should not lose any of setup and configuration information when the PDA 1150 runs out of power, the remote control application may store this type of data in non-volatile memory (if available) and may inhibit any write activity (i.e., changes to that memory) during low power situations.” The inhibiting of writing activity is deemed as powering down a hardware component.) of the computing device.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 4, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 2 (See Above), wherein the processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) is configured to remove (Figure 2, Element 208. Paragraph 47) the one or more of the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) from handling the one or more other functions.
Colenbrander is silent with regards to remove the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to close the one or more other functions.
Dresti et al. teach to remove the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to close (Paragraph 306. Dresti et al. discloses “the remote control application may store this type of data in non-volatile memory (if available) and may inhibit any write activity (i.e., changes to that memory) during low power situations.”) the one or more other functions.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 5, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 2 (See Above), wherein the processing module (Figure 1, Element not labeled, but is the processing device of client device (Element 122). Paragraph 38. The examiner notes that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a game console, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, etc. will have a processing device.) is configured to remove (Figure 2, Element 208. Paragraph 47) the one or more of the computing resources (Paragraphs 102 - 107) from handling the one or more other functions.
Colenbrander is silent with regards to remove the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to suspend the one or more other functions.
Dresti et al. teach to remove the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions by being configured to suspend (Paragraph 307) the one or more other functions.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Dresti et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 14, Colenbrander teaches the method of claim 12 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein prioritizing the computing resources for the interaction with the content includes removing one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions.
Dresti et al. teach wherein prioritizing the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) for the interaction with the content includes removing one or more of the computing resources from handling (Paragraph 307) the one or more other functions.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Dresti et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 15, Colenbrander in view of Dresti et al. teach the method of claim 14 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions includes powering down a hardware component of the computing device.
Dresti et al. teach wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions includes powering down a hardware component (Paragraph 306. Dresti et al. discloses “Since the remote control application should not lose any of setup and configuration information when the PDA 1150 runs out of power, the remote control application may store this type of data in non-volatile memory (if available) and may inhibit any write activity (i.e., changes to that memory) during low power situations.” The inhibiting of writing activity is deemed as powering down a hardware component.) of the computing device.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Dresti et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 16, Colenbrander in view of Dresti et al. teach the method of claim 14 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions includes closing the one or more other functions.
Dresti et al. teach to wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions includes closing (Paragraph 306. Dresti et al. discloses “the remote control application may store this type of data in non-volatile memory (if available) and may inhibit any write activity (i.e., changes to that memory) during low power situations.”) the one or more other functions.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 17, Colenbrander in view of Dresti et al. teach the method of claim 14 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources from handling the one or more other functions includes suspending the one or more other functions.
Dresti et al. teach wherein removing the one or more of the computing resources (Element memory. Paragraph 306) from handling the one or more other functions includes suspending (Paragraph 307) the one or more other functions.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the user interface remote of Dresti et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240) in view of Chen (U.S. PG Pub 2017/0032909).
Regarding Claim 6, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 1 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein the one or more customizable features further includes an anti-ghosting feature to address unintended key presses.
Chen teaches wherein the one or more customizable features further includes an anti-ghosting feature to address unintended key presses (Figures 4 and 5. Paragraph 28).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the anti-ghosting keys of Chen. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Chen is to avoid the ghosting problem while saving cost and time, as taught by Chen (Paragraph 8).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240) in view of Wojcik et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2015/0220245).
Regarding Claim 7, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 1 (See Above), wherein the one or more customizable features (Figure 2, Element 210. Paragraph 48) further includes an input element.
Colenbrander is silent with regards to the input element to support a one click launch experience to start a cloud-based application from a selected one of the one or more remote services.
Wojcik et al. teach an input element to support a one click launch experience to start a cloud-based application (Paragraph 53) from a selected one of the one or more remote services (Figure 11, Element not labeled, but is the graphical elements. Paragraph 37).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the one click function of Wojcik et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Wojcik et al. is to provide a call-back feature with a custom library, as taught by Wojcik et al. (Paragraph 53).
Claims 8 – 9, 11, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240) in view of Powderly (U.S. PG Pub 2018/0350150).
Regarding Claim 8, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 1 (See Above), wherein the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) is a keyboard (Paragraph 38).
Colenbrander is silent with regards to the specific element of the user input device is a selected key of the keyboard.
Powderly et al. teach the specific element (Figure 14, Elements 1412 - 1418. Paragraph 149) of the user input device (Figure 4, Element 466. Paragraph 72) is a selected key of the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to open a virtual menu by actuating a key, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 118).
Regarding Claim 9, Colenbrander teaches the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 1 (See Above), wherein the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) is a keyboard (Paragraph 38).
Colenbrander is silent with regards to the keyboard is configured to illuminate with a selected color scheme corresponding to the content.
Powderly teaches the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) is configured to illuminate with a selected color scheme corresponding to the content (Paragraph 186).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to extract information based on light patterns from a physical keyboard, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 186).
Regarding Claim 11, Colenbrander in view of Powderly teach the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 9 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein the keyboard is configured to illuminate in a pattern having multiple zones for different regions of the keyboard.
Powderly et al. teach wherein the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) is configured to illuminate in a pattern (Paragraph 186) having multiple zones (Figure 14, Elements 1412 - 1418. Paragraph 149) for different regions of the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to extract information based on light patterns from a physical keyboard, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 186).
Regarding Claim 18, Colenbrander teaches the method of claim 12 (See Above), wherein the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) is a keyboard (Paragraph 38).
Colenbrander is silent with regards to the method further includes causing the keyboard to illuminate according to a selected color scheme corresponding to the content.
Powderly teaches the method further includes causing the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) to illuminate according to a selected color scheme corresponding to the content (Paragraph 186).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to extract information based on light patterns from a physical keyboard, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 186).
Regarding Claim 20, Colenbrander teaches the method of claim 12 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein the user input device (Figure 1, Element 120. Paragraph 38) is a keyboard and the method further includes causing the keyboard to illuminate according to a pattern having multiple zones for different regions of the keyboard.
Powderly et al. teach wherein the user input device (Figure 4, Element 466. Paragraph 72) is a keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) and the method further includes causing the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) to illuminate according to a pattern having multiple zones (Figure 14, Elements 1412 - 1418. Paragraph 149) for different regions of the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to extract information based on light patterns from a physical keyboard, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 186).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0146240) in view of Powderly (U.S. PG Pub 2018/0350150) in view of Zhang (U.S. PG Pub 2019/0361543).
Regarding Claim 10, Colenbrander in view of Powderly teach the computing device (Figure 1, Element 122. Paragraph 38) of claim 9 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein the keyboard is configured to illuminate in a pattern corresponding to wallpaper being generated for display on the display module.
Powderly et al. teach wherein the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) is configured to illuminate in a pattern (Paragraph 186).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander with the keyboard system of Powderly et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander with the teachings of Powderly et al. is to be able to extract information based on light patterns from a physical keyboard, as taught by Powderly et al. (Paragraph 186).
Zhang teaches the pattern corresponding to wallpaper (Figures 8A and 8B, Elements 822 and 832. Paragraphs 111 – 115 and 122) being generated for display on the display module.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander and the keyboard system of Powderly et al. with the wall paper pattern of Zhang. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander and Powderly et al. with the teachings of Zhang is to provide detailed graphical outputs to be displayed on areas of the keyboard, as taught by Zhang (Paragraph 108).
Regarding Claim 19, Colenbrander teaches the method of claim 12 (See Above). Colenbrander is silent with regards to wherein the user input device is a keyboard and the method further includes causing the keyboard to illuminate according to a pattern corresponding to wallpaper being generated for display on a display device of the computing device.
Powderly et al. teach wherein the user input device (Figure 4, Element 466. Paragraph 72) is a keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) and the method further includes causing the keyboard (Figure 12, Element 1240. Paragraphs 118 - 119) to illuminate according to a pattern (Paragraph 186).
Zhang teaches the pattern corresponding to wallpaper (Figures 8A and 8B, Elements 822 and 832. Paragraphs 111 – 115 and 122) being generated for display on the display module.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the gaming device of Colenbrander and the keyboard system of Powderly et al. with the wall paper pattern of Zhang. The motivation to modify the teachings of Colenbrander and Powderly et al. with the teachings of Zhang is to provide detailed graphical outputs to be displayed on areas of the keyboard, as taught by Zhang (Paragraph 108).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Card et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,646,652) disclose a visualization method where nodes are changed size in order to show a Degree of Interest (DOI).
Hao et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2008/0180382) disclose a visualization method which changes the display area and/or resolution based on Degree of Interest (DOI) and/or value of change in the data.
Talwar et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2018/0004456) teaches a memory network that is capable of prioritizing memory access traffic for particular programs.
Shveidel et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2021/0406066) teaches prioritizing thread queues for different classes of service.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW B SCHNIREL whose telephone number is (571)270-7690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 - 6 EST.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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 user (Figure 1, Element 118. Paragraph 38)s. 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.
/A.B.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
/WILLIAM BODDIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights