DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 8 and 10 recites the limitation "the determining the third virtual object as the target virtual object" in lines 1 and 2 respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 has been amended by the applicant to change “determining” to “a second target indicator that indicates” and as such there is now no longer sufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
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, 8-15, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemori et al., US 2010/0302238, in view of reddit.com webpage titled “Targeting struggles (Healing/DPS target alteration)” by erbsenbrei (hereinafter Erbsenbrei), and Kojiro et al., JP 2019-136358. In the interest of advancing prosecution reference to Kojiro et al. will be made in regard to the figures on the Japanese publication and English machine translation of Kojiro et al. obtained from https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/.
In Reference to Claims 1, 16, and 20
Yonemori et al. teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions for a processor, a virtual object control apparatus with processing circuitry (Fig. 1 and Par. 167, 172-173 and 177-178), and a virtual object control method comprising, outputting for a displaying a user interface that includes a plurality of player functions (Fig. 4A, 16A and Par. 3, 218 which teach a user interface for displaying a battle between a player character and enemy characters. And Par. 194 which teach various function types such as an attack motion and a guard motion), receiving a user input selecting a function for a first virtual object (Fig. 4A-4B and Par. 206 and 221-222 which teach where an attack motion instruction can be input for character CH to, for example, kick or punch, character CHT); determining by processing circuitry a second virtual object as a target virtual object for the function (Par. 220-222 which teaches that based on the game camera observing CH and CHT that CHT is designated the “attack target” with a marker and that character CHT will be attacked when the play makes an attack input); based on a quantitative targeting parameter value of targeting criteria associated with the selected function type, the quantitative targeting parameter values including a quantitative targeting parameter value that is based on a direction
angle of the second virtual object relative to the first virtual object (Fig. 13, 16A-17, Par. 265-266 and Par. 273-276. See in particular Fig. 13 and the given range “angle alpha” which is a direction with quantitative parameter value based on a direction angle); outputting for display a first target indicator that indicates the second virtual object is the
target virtual object, the first target indicator including a visual indication based on quantitative targeting parameter value, the first target indicator being updated in
synchronization with the at least two quantitative targeting parameter values in real-time (Fig. 13, 16A-17, Par. 265-266 and Par. 273-276 which teach a “free walk” control and targeting scheme where when a player provides a direction input using an analog stick input, where the player character CH changes their position and/or facing direction such that the prior attack target is no longer in the narrow angle direction alpha in front of the character and a new enemy character is now within the narrow angle direction and subsequently the attack target character “CHT” is switched from the prior enemy character to the new enemy character. See also Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 272-276 which teaches that targets are immediately updated in response the player movement changing the facing of the character and Par. 271 which teaches the system updating a target every frame, which examiner considers the system the first target indictor being updated in synchronization with the quantitative targeting parameter value in real-time); determining, during execution of the selected function type whether the target virtual object for the function is to be changed to a third virtual object based on a direction setting operation received through a user interface; and outputting for display a second target indicator that indicates the third virtual object is the target virtual object (Fig. 13, 16A-17, Par. 265-266 and Par. 273-276. See the indicator E1, E2, and E3 switching between enemy targets as the player moves to change their character orientation. And further where the player is changing targets during the “battle mode” where the character is making attacks one the enemy characters. Examiner considers this to be “during execution of the selected function type” of attacking in battle).
Further, Yonemori et al. teaches that in additional to a quantitative parameter value of direction angle, targeting can be based on a quantitative parameter value of distance (Fig. 14A-15 and Par. 267-271). However, Yonemori et al. does not teach where the function is a function type selected from a plurality of function types, and each function type from the plurality of function types indicating a target category among a plurality of objects in a virtual scene, where targets are selected from the target category indicated by the selected function type, or where the targeting based on quantitative targeting parameters is based on at least two quantitative targeting parameter values of targeting criteria associated with the selected function type, the at least two quantitative targeting parameter values including (i) a first quantitative targeting parameter value based on a distance between the first virtual object and the second virtual object and (ii) a second quantitative targeting parameter value that is based on a direction angle of the second virtual object relative to the first virtual object.
Erbsenbrei teaches a gaming method which includes a function type selected from a plurality of function types, and each function type from the plurality of function types indicating a target category among a plurality of objects in a virtual scene and where targets are selected from the target category indicated by the selected function type (“The last MMO I actively played was Warhammer Online which had a neat feature allowing to target a friendly as well as hostile target simultaneously. Support skills would automatically be cast on your friendly target while Damage spells would automatically be directed towards your hostile target selection.” Where in the examiner’s opinion the user is selecting function types of either damage spells or support skills via a user input during gameplay and where support skills automatically target the category of “friendly targets” and damage spell automatically target the category of “hostile targets”).
It would be desirable to modify the method of target selection in Yonemori et al. to targets selection to cause damaging actions automatically target enemies while supportive actions are applied to friendly teammates as taught by Erbsenbrei in order to increase the enjoyment of the player by reducing the likelihood of mistargeting and accidentally attack a friendly teammate or healing a hostile enemy as taught by Erbsenbrei.
Kojiro et al. teaches a game system (Par. 1) where the targeting based on quantitative targeting parameters is based on at least two quantitative targeting parameter values of targeting criteria associated with the selected function type, the at least two quantitative targeting parameter values including (i) a first quantitative targeting parameter value based on a distance between the first virtual object and the second virtual object and (ii) a second quantitative targeting parameter value that is based on a direction angle of the second virtual object relative to the first virtual object (Fig. 5-6 and Par. 183-194 which teaches a multi-step process for determining a “lock -on” target for a player character where the system first checks for the presence of enemy characters within an angle in the direction the player is facing, and if there are multiple enemy characters within the angle it then proceeds to secondary criteria where it chooses the enemy closest to the player. In particular see Par. 187-188 “On the other hand, as illustrated in FIG. 5 b, when the arrangement status information of the objects indicates that two or more objects OB1 and OB2 are present in the first area A1, the lock-on processing unit 218 determines the object OB1 close to the reference position in the first area A1 as the lock-on object.” and “That is, in this case, as shown in FIG. 5 b, since the distance L11 from the player object (reference position) P1 to the object OB1 is shorter than the distance L12 from the player object (reference position) P2 to the object OB2, the lock-on processing section 218 determines whether or not The object OB1 is determined as a lock-on object.”).
It would be desirable to modify the system of Yonemori et al. and Erbsenbrei, to include a multiple criteria lock-on system using a plurality of criteria including both angle and distance as described by Kojiro et al. in order to improve the accuracy of the player in selecting the target which they wish to use their ability or action as described in Par. 7 of Kojiro et al.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method of target selection in Yonemori et al. to cause damaging actions automatically target enemies while supportive actions are applied to friendly teammates as taught by Erbsenbrei and to modify the system of Yonemori et al. and Erbsenbrei, to include a multiple criteria lock-on system using a plurality of criteria including both angle and distance as described by Kojiro et al.
In Reference to Clams 2 and 17
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach where the determining whether the target virtual object of for the selected function type is to be changed comprises: determining that the target virtual object for the selected function type is to be changed to the third virtual object based on a deviation between a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation and a direction of the second virtual object relative to a direction of the first virtual object exceeding a threshold (Yonemori et al. Fig. 13, 16A-17, Par. 265-266 and Par. 273-276. See in particular Fig. 13 and the given range “angle alpha” Erbsenbrei which teaches the different selected function types of support skills and damage spells as taught above in reference to Claim 1).
In Reference to Claims 3 and 18
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach displaying a function target identifier in association with the second virtual object based on the second virtual object being determined as the target virtual object for the selected function type; and displaying the function target identifier in association with the third virtual object based on the third virtual object being determined as the target virtual object for the selected function type (Yonemori et al. Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 273-276 which teach a marker which indicates the target “E1,” “E2,” and “E3.”. Erbsenbrei which teach the different selectable function types as described above).
In Reference to Claim 8
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach where after the determining the third virtual object as the target virtual object, the method further comprises performing an operation associated with the selected function type on the third virtual object based on at least one of (1) a display duration of a function target identifier in association with the third virtual object exceeding a duration threshold or (ii) a perform operation input for the selected function type (Yonemori et al. Par. 221 “attack motion instruction” which examiner considers a perform operation of the function. Erbsenbrei which teaches selectable support and damage function types as described above in reference to Claim 1).
In Reference to Claim 9
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach wherein after the performing the operation associated with the selected function type on the third virtual object, the method further comprises determining, in response to a direction change operation that is associated with the selected function type and a deviation between a changed direction and a direction of the third virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object, a fourth virtual object as the target virtual object according to the changed direction while performing the function; and continuing to perform the operation associated with the selected function type on the fourth virtual object (Yonemori et al. Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 275 which teaches where after switching from a first enemy to a second enemy based on direction input further directional input can cause the game to select a third enemy character as the attack target, see indicator E3, and Par. 221-222 which teaches where attack operations performed by the player are performed against the selected attack target).
In Reference to Claim 10
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach the determining the third virtual object as the target virtual object includes determining a virtual object in a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation and closest to the first virtual object as the third virtual object based on an angle deviation between the set direction and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object being greater than a deviation threshold (Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 272-276 which teaches where after switching from a first enemy to a second enemy based on direction input further directional input can cause the game to select a third enemy character as the attack target, see indicator E3. Where Fig. 13 and Par. 265-266 teach the angle deviation threshold as described above), the third virtual object and the first virtual object belong to different groups when the selected function type is associated with a confrontational behavior, and the third virtual object and the first virtual object belong to a same group when the selected function type is associated with an assisting behavior (Erbsenbrei “The last MMO I actively played was Warhammer Online which had a neat feature allowing to target a friendly as well as hostile target simultaneously. Support skills would automatically be cast on your friendly target while Damage spells would automatically be directed towards your hostile target selection.”).
In Reference to Claim 11
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teaches a method as described above in reference to Claim 2, and further teaches displaying prompt information with regard to the target selection of the player (Yonemori et al. Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 273-276 which teach a marker which indicates the target “E1,” “E2,” and “E3.”) and teaches selection of targets for the selected function type based on a direction angle as described above. However, Yonemori et al. does not explicitly teach displaying prompt information to reset the set direction based on an angle deviation between the set direction and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object being greater than a deviation threshold and no other virtual object on which the function is performable being in the set direction.
Kojiro et al. teaches displaying prompt information to reset the set direction based on an angle deviation between the set direction and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object being greater than a deviation threshold and no other virtual object on which the function is performable being in the set direction (See Par. 173 “In a case where there is no object corresponding to both of the first lock-on condition and the second lock-on condition, the lock-on process is stopped.” Which teaches that if there is no lock-on target in the search direction of in front of the character then the “lock-on” is stopped. And see Par. 220-221 that teaches where when locked on the player aiming reticle has a visually different appearance. Thus stopping the lock-on operation because there are no enemies within the user selected direction alters the appearance of the players reticle to be “not locked on.” Examiner considers this “not locked on” reticle to constitute “displaying prompt information to reset the set direction” since it can serve as a reminder to the player that nothing is locked on and they should face an enemy if they wish to attack one).
It would be desirable to modify the method of Yonemori et al. and Erbsenbrei to include stopping of the lock-on process and cancelling of the visual indicator of lock-on as taught by Kojiro et al. in order to remind the player that they are not facing an enemy and that the players attacks will not land when executed so they should move such that an enemy is in from of them. This could be implemented by, for example, removing the target indictor E1 if no enemy is being faced by the player.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method of Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro to include stopping of the lock-on process and cancelling of the visual indicator of lock-on as taught by Kojiro et al.
In Reference to Claim 12
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teaches while responding to the direction setting operation on the selected function type, the method further comprises displaying first prompt information when a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation is within a second direction range, the first prompt information indicating that the target virtual object on which the selected function type is to be performed is based on the set direction (Yonemori et al. Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 273-276 which teach a marker which indicates the target “E1,” “E2,” and “E3” which swaps between enemies as the player changes the facing direction of their character).
In Reference to Claim 13
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teaches wherein while responding to the direction setting operation on the selected function type, the method further comprises displaying second prompt information when a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation is within a third direction range, the second prompt information indicating that the target virtual object on which the selected function type is to be performed is the second virtual object (Yonemori et al. Fig. 16A-17 and Par. 273-276 which teach a marker which indicates the target “E1,” “E2,” and “E3” which swaps between enemies as the player changes the facing direction of their character).
In Reference to Claim 14
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teaches where wherein after the determining the second virtual object as the target virtual object for the selected function type, the method further comprises: performing an operation associated with the selected function type on the second virtual object based on at least one of (i) a display duration of a function target identifier in association with the second virtual object exceeding a duration threshold or (ii) a perform operation input for the selected function type (Yonemori et al. See Fig. 16A for a point during gameplay where the second object CHT1 is designated the attack target and Par. 221-222 “attack motion instruction” which teaches where attack inputs by the player attack the “CHT” designated by the game. Where examiner considers this attack motion instruction to constitute a perform operation of the function. Erbsenbrei which teaches where the player can select to perform either damage spell or support skill function types).
In Reference to Claim 15
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teaches a method as described above in reference to Claim 3, including displaying a target identifier and selecting a target virtual object for the selected function type based on an angle deviation between a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object. However, Yonemori et al. does not explicitly teach wherein after the direction setting operation on the function is received continuing to select the second virtual object based on an angle deviation between a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object being greater than a deviation threshold and no other virtual object on which the function is performable being in the set direction.
Kojiro et al. teaches where after the direction setting operation on the function is received continuing to select the second virtual object based on an angle deviation between a set direction indicated by the direction setting operation and the direction of the second virtual object relative to the direction of the first virtual object being greater than a deviation threshold and no other virtual object on which the function is performable being in the set direction (Kojiro et al. Par. 203-208 which teaches a “third lock-on condition where if no enemy targets satisfy the first two conditions such as a narrow angle and distance, the lock-on system changes to a third condition such as a wider angle. See particularly Par. 207 “For example, the lock-on processing unit 218 may set, as the third lock-on condition (1) an object is present in an image of a game space (i.e., a game space image) generated based on a reference position; (2) existing in a range determined by a search angle γ wider than the search angle β forming the second region; (3) existing within a predetermined distance from the reference position in the game space;” See also Par. 200 which tach the selection angles are arbitrary. Thus if after the player moves in a direction the first enemy CHT1, See Fig. 4B of Yonemori et al., was no longer in a narrow angle “alpha” in from the player by was still with a second wider angle and no enemy was present within the narrower angle alpha the selection of CHT1 as the target could be continued to display).
It would be desirable to modify the method of Yonemori and Erbsenbrei to include the fallback target selection of selecting a target with an angle greater than the deviation threshold when no target is in the set direction as taught by Kojiro et al. in order to prevent the game from confusing the player by constantly selecting and deselecting the combat target too easily when the player makes small positioning adjustments that to the wide fall back angle for target selection, while still allowing the player to make more precise selection of particular desired targets when multiple opponents are present thanks to a narrower primary selection angle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method of Yonemori et al. and Erbsenbrei to include the fallback target selection of selecting a target with an angle greater than the deviation threshold when no target is in the set direction as taught by Kojiro et al.
Claim(s) 4-7 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yonemori et al., US 2010/0302238, Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al., JP 2019-136358, further in view of Hall, US 2015/0157940.
In Reference to Claims 4 and 19
Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei, and Kojiro et al. teach a method and apparatus as described above in reference to Claims 1 and 16, including where lock on targeting is based on a plurality of criteria including at least two quantitative parameter values. Further Kojiro et al. teaches that additional factors beyond angle and distance can be used for determining target lock-on priority (Par. 175) and teaches gathering information about potential lock-on targets including quantitative values of the targets such as offense or defense capability(Par. 179). However, they do not explicitly teach where the targeting criteria further include at least one of a health status or a defense capability, and the criteria further include a quantitative targeting parameter value for each of the at least one of the health status or the defense capability.
Hall teaches a game targeting system (Abstract) which teaches where the targeting criteria further include at least one of a health status or a defense capability, and the criteria further include a quantitative targeting parameter value for each of the at least one of the health status or the defense capability (Par 23 and 33 which teaches targeting priority based on a plurality of factors including proximity to the player, proximity to the facing direction of the player, and target health as an approximation of the targets threat level).
It would be desirable to modify the method and system of Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei and Kojiro et al. to include targeting based on target health in addition to angle and distance as taught by Hall in order to improve the target selection for the player while they are moving their character in the battle mode to better ensure that the targeted character is the highest priority target. For example, if two enemies are close by in the players facing direction, targeting the enemy that is at lower health first can allow the player to more quickly reduce the number of threats.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method and system of Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei and Kojiro et al. to include targeting based on target health in addition to angle and distance as taught by Hall.
In Reference to Claim 5
Yonemori et al. as modified by Erbsenbrei, Kojiro et al., and Hall teaches the selected function type is associated with a priority criterion from the targeting criteria, and the priority criterion has a highest priority; and the determining the second virtual object as the target virtual object comprises: determining, a plurality of candidate virtual objects from the target category indicated by the selected function type with quantitative targeting parameter values corresponding to the targeting criteria that are within corresponding parameter ranges; and determining the candidate virtual object with the highest quantitative parameter value corresponding to the priority criterion as the second virtual object (Kojiro et al. Fig. 5 and Par. 183-194 which teach that the multiple indicators and gone through in a step-wise fashion and when multiple candidates fulfill the criteria, such as being within the narrow facing angle shown in Fig. 5A-5B and “close” to the player the target chosen is the one with has highest parameter value of one a “priority” indicator. In this case the “closest” enemy it chosen and thus “closeness” is the priority indicator. And Erbsenbrei which teaches dividing potential targets based on function type as described above).
In Reference to Claim 6
Yonemori et al. as modified by Erbsenbrei, Kojiro et al., and Hall et al. teaches the targeting criteria for the selected function type includes direction angle and a distance (Kojiro et al. Fig. 5 and Par. 183-194 which teach facing angle and the enemy that is closest to the player. See also Hall Par. 23 and 33); a parameter range of the direction angle includes a first direction range (Kojiro et al. Fig. 5); at least one parameter range of the distance includes a first distance range and a second distance range (Kojiro et al. Fig. 5 and Par. 187-188 which teach distances L11 and L12), a priority of the first distance range being higher than a priority of the second distance range (Fig. 5b and Par. 188 which teaches where the system chooses the closer enemy character even though both characters in in front of the player character); and the determining the plurality of candidate virtual objects comprises: determining whether at least one candidate virtual object of the plurality of candidate virtual objects has a quantitative targeting parameter value for the direction angle within the first direction range and a quantitative targeting parameter value for the distance within the first distance range (Kojiro et al. Fig. 5 and Par. 183-194); and determining whether at least one second candidate virtual object of the plurality of candidate virtual objects has a quantitative targeting parameter value for the direction angle within the first direction range and a quantitative targeting parameter value for the distance within the second distance range based on a determination that no virtual object has quantitative targeting parameter values within the first direction range and within the first distance range (Kojiro et al. Par. 203-208 which teaches a “third lock-on condition” where when there is no enemy target which satisfy the initial direction and distance criteria, the criteria can be expanded to find a target in a new larger search area. Although Par. 203-208 teaches this as widening the search angle, Par. 216-217 teaches that the third lock-on condition could also be “On the other hand, the lock-on processing section 218 may include, as the third lock-on condition, a condition related to the distance from the reference position to the object as long as it is a selection condition for the object in the game space, as in the third determination process 1 described above.” And “(B6) an object located within a predetermined range from the player character in the game space;”).
In Reference to Claim 7
Yonemori et al. as modified by Erbsenbrei, Kojiro et al., and Hall et al. teach where determining the second virtual object as the target object comprises: determining virtual objects that are opponents of the first virtual object based on the selected function type being associated with a confrontational behavior; and determining virtual objects that are teammates of the first virtual object based on the selected function type being associated with an assisting behavior (Erbsenbrei “The last MMO I actively played was Warhammer Online which had a neat feature allowing to target a friendly as well as hostile target simultaneously. Support skills would automatically be cast on your friendly target while Damage spells would automatically be directed towards your hostile target selection.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/03/2025 have been fully considered. After further search and consideration the examiner has determined that the Kojiro et al. reference teaches the missing claim limitations added via amendment in Claims 1, 16, and 20. New grounds of rejection based on Yonemori et al., Erbsenbrei and Kojiro et al. have been provided to better address the new scope of the amended claims. Specifically in the examiner’s opinion the two stage lock-on determination based on player facing angle and enemy distance teach the “two quantitative targeting parameters” recited in the claims, see Kojiro et al. Fig. 5-6.
Regarding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, examiner considers the newly added limitation of “outputting for display a first target indicator that indicates the second virtual object is the target virtual object, the first target indicator including a visual indication based on the at least two quantitative targeting parameter values, the first target indicator being updated in synchronization with the at least two quantitative targeting parameter values in real-time;” to recite a particular method for outputting a display indicator which represents an improvement to the functioning of the computer interface which integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. As such rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL V LARSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 10:00 am - 6:30 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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/CARL V LARSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3715