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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed November 18, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Applicant has submitted amendments to the claims along with other remarks. Applicant’s amendments to the drawings overcome the rejection. Claims 1-15 are still rejected by prior art references and claims 16-20 are withdrawn per the response to election filed November 18, 2025, refer to the following rejection for details.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see pp. 9-17 of the response, filed July 21, 2025, (hereinafter “Response”) with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under § 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant alleges that the “’work site identification’ discussed in Duff is not manually ‘entered into a first user interface presented via the cellular site image capture application’ . . . but rather, is automatically populated based on a GPS received [by] the workers device.” Response at 13. Applicant alleges that the only manual input in Duff is related to “metadata regarding those images” related to the damage of a component. Response at 13-14.
Duff, however, does specify that the manual input may be a cellular site identifier, as recited. [0052] of Duff states that “rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system (“GPS”) receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number.” In other words, the field worker can manually input the work site identification number as recited in the claim. Further, [0058] describes “detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification . . . allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.” And [0059] concludes, “Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools . . . .” Therefore, Duff teaches both the manual entry of a cellular site identifier and authenticating based on the manually entered identifier. Further, Duff provides a “second user interface . . . in response to receiving the manually entered cellular site identifier and the authenticating” in Figure 4 and the associated paragraphs (e.g., [0058]). The interface of Figure 4 does not show an input for manually entering information, which would be on a separate interface.
Therefore the rejection is maintained.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 10 objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite “following the capturing, disabling, through the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature,” which is unclear because the specification does not provide how the image capture application would disable the image capture feature. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duff in view of U.S. Publication No. 2016/0227114 (hereinafter “Gren”).
Regarding claim 1, Duff teaches: A method comprising ([0048] For instance, after a client company has logged in and retrieved files (1322), he or she can review the retrieved files to satisfy himself or herself that the submitted report is correct and that the requested maintenance (e.g., maintenance on LTE, UMTS, GSM, iDEN, CDMA, DAS, microwave, Two-Way, WIMAX, WIFI, VoLTE, and/or broadband infrastructure or components), inspection or other work was performed properly): receiving, by a user equipment (UE), an activation of a cellular site image capture application of the UE ([0036] As another example of a potential variation, it is possible that, rather than using a website as described, the disclosed technology could be implemented to provide the functionality of the field worker portal (106), the client portal (108), or both, using a dedicated application which would run on a remote device (e.g., a mobile device (112) for a field worker, and a desktop computer (114) for a client company).); receiving, by the cellular site image capture application, user input associated with a specific cellular site ([0059] Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools (e.g., text fields, radio buttons, selection menus, etc), or could be automatically populated in a manner similar to that described previously (e.g., location information could automatically be populated in an input form using a GPS receiver in a field worker's mobile device). [0069] When referred to in the claims, a "means for facilitating standardized automated submission and centralization of files for closing out telecommunications infrastructure maintenance work" should be understood as a limitation set forth in the form of a means for performing a specified function as provided for in the sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. .sctn.112 in which the specified function is "facilitating standardized automated submission and centralization of files for closing out telecommunications infrastructure maintenance work" and the corresponding structure is a system having physical components such as the servers and databases as shown in FIGS. 1 and 12, where the servers are programmed to perform algorithms including steps of retrieving file submission interface parameters, generating an interface (examples of which are provided in FIGS. 2, 4, 10 and 17A-C) based on those parameters, sending code to a remotely located field worker device configured to cause that device to present the interface to the field worker, receiving files from the remotely located field worker device, and storing the files in a central database.), wherein receiving the user input comprises receiving a manually entered cellular site identifier entered into a first user interface presented via the cellular site image capture application ([0052] of Duff states that “rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system (“GPS”) receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number.” In other words, the field worker can manually input the work site identification number as recited in the claim. Further, [0058] describes “detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification . . . allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.” And [0059] concludes, “Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools . . . .”); authenticating the specific cellular site based on the user input, on location information associated with the UE, and on information stored for the specific cellular site ([0058] Of course, while an interface such as shown in FIG. 4 can allow a user to identify and correct images to be submitted, it is also possible that the disclosed technology could be implemented to be able to allow for automatic detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification such as described above. For example, the disclosed technology could be configured to automatically acquire location information (e.g., from a GPS receiver in a field worker device) at the time an image is captured, then send that information to the server at the time the image is uploaded, thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict. [0059] Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools (e.g., text fields, radio buttons, selection menus, etc), or could be automatically populated in a manner similar to that described previously (e.g., location information could automatically be populated in an input form using a GPS receiver in a field worker's mobile device).); based at least in part on the authenticating, enabling, by the cellular site image capture application, an image capture feature of the cellular site image capture application ([0058] For example, the disclosed technology could be configured to automatically acquire location information (e.g., from a GPS receiver in a field worker device) at the time an image is captured, then send that information to the server at the time the image is uploaded, thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.) on a second user interface presented via the cellular site image capture application (Figure 4 and the associated paragraphs, e.g., [0058]; the interface of Figure 4 does not show an input for manually entering information), the second user interface being presented in response to receiving the manually entered cellular site identifier and the authenticating; capturing, by the UE through the cellular site image capture application, an image of the specific cellular site ([0058] Of course, while an interface such as shown in FIG. 4 can allow a user to identify and correct images to be submitted,); and following the capturing, disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature.
Duff discloses each of the recited “the user input, on location information associated with the UE, and on information stored for the specific cellular site.” However, Duff does not require authenticating the specific cellular site based on each and every of these elements at the same time, as recited. Authentication of this specific cellular site would be obvious to try under MPEP § 2143(I)(E) because: (1) at the relevant time, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art, which may include a design need or market pressure to solve a problem ([0058] thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict); (2) there had been a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem (each of the recited elements are found in Duff and are used in combination [0052], [0058]); (3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (Duff discloses each of these elements in various combinations); and (4) whatever additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries may be necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness.
Duff discloses closing out the work file at the completion of the task ([0044] Continuing with the discussion of FIG. 13, in step eight of the method depicted in that figure, the worker navigates to a file upload page of the website (1314). Many field reports require certain files to be uploaded in addition to, or as part of, a submitted form. These files are often referred to as closeout files and are useful in order for the company to consider the case closed.) Duff does not explicitly disclose disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Gren teaches: following the capturing, disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature (Abstract - In one example, a plurality of image frames captured by a digital camera unit is received. It is determined that a condition is met that requires a switch between image capture states. In response, automatic adjustment of at least one image capture parameter without user input is enabled or disabled.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Duff to include the feature of disabling the image capture feature and a combination of Duff with Gren renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., electronics engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., disabling the capture feature after the capturing to improve energy consumption, closing out of project, etc.).
Regarding claim 2, Duff teaches: wherein receiving the user input comprises receiving a cellular site identifier or a cellular site location ([0052] For example, rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system ("GPS") receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number.).
Regarding claim 3, Duff teaches: wherein the authenticating includes sending the user input and the location information to a remote system which accesses the information stored for the specific cellular site to determine if there is a match ([0052] For example, rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system (“GPS”) receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number. [0058] it is also possible that the disclosed technology could be implemented to be able to allow for automatic detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification such as described above. For example, the disclosed technology could be configured to automatically acquire location information (e.g., from a GPS receiver in a field worker device) at the time an image is captured, then send that information to the server at the time the image is uploaded, thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.).
Regarding claim 5, Duff teaches: enabling, by the cellular site image capture application, entry of supplementary information associated with a captured image ([0057] To facilitate this type of interaction, the disclosed technology could be implemented to provide an interface which would allow a field worker both to select an image to upload and to indicate which image requirement that image is satisfying (e.g. `Left Side Component A`, `Right Side Component B`).).
Regarding claim 6, Duff teaches: sending, by the UE, the captured image to an image storage system ([0031] As will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art, a website used to implement the disclosed technology could require significant amounts of physical memory in which to store data. To address this need, a system implemented using the disclosed technology can comprise a database accessible via the website and used for storing all necessary forms, information, and files in an organized manner such that they may be retrieved by the website at any time. The exact physical manifestation of such a database may vary in from embodiment to embodiment, as there are many methods of mass physical memory storage known in the art of internet websites.).
Regarding claim 8, Duff teaches: enabling, by the cellular site image capture application, access to a cellular site image stored in an image storage system ([0054] Alternate embodiments of this technology may retrieve a different set of parameters, such as an example or comparison image).
Regarding claim 9, Duff teaches: enabling, by the cellular site image capture application, entry of supplementary information for a cellular site image stored in the image storage system or editing of supplementary information for a cellular site image stored in the image storage system ([0031], [0057]).
Regarding claim 10, Duff teaches: A non-transitory computer storage medium having stored thereon a plurality of programming instructions that, when executed by a user equipment (UE), cause the UE to perform operations comprising ([0048] For instance, after a client company has logged in and retrieved files (1322), he or she can review the retrieved files to satisfy himself or herself that the submitted report is correct and that the requested maintenance (e.g., maintenance on LTE, UMTS, GSM, iDEN, CDMA, DAS, microwave, Two-Way, WIMAX, WIFI, VoLTE, and/or broadband infrastructure or components), inspection or other work was performed properly): receiving an activation of a cellular site image capture application of the UE ([0036] As another example of a potential variation, it is possible that, rather than using a website as described, the disclosed technology could be implemented to provide the functionality of the field worker portal (106), the client portal (108), or both, using a dedicated application which would run on a remote device (e.g., a mobile device (112) for a field worker, and a desktop computer (114) for a client company).); receiving, by through the cellular site image capture application, user input associated with a specific cellular site ([0059] Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools (e.g., text fields, radio buttons, selection menus, etc), or could be automatically populated in a manner similar to that described previously (e.g., location information could automatically be populated in an input form using a GPS receiver in a field worker's mobile device). [0069] When referred to in the claims, a "means for facilitating standardized automated submission and centralization of files for closing out telecommunications infrastructure maintenance work" should be understood as a limitation set forth in the form of a means for performing a specified function as provided for in the sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. .sctn.112 in which the specified function is "facilitating standardized automated submission and centralization of files for closing out telecommunications infrastructure maintenance work" and the corresponding structure is a system having physical components such as the servers and databases as shown in FIGS. 1 and 12, where the servers are programmed to perform algorithms including steps of retrieving file submission interface parameters, generating an interface (examples of which are provided in FIGS. 2, 4, 10 and 17A-C) based on those parameters, sending code to a remotely located field worker device configured to cause that device to present the interface to the field worker, receiving files from the remotely located field worker device, and storing the files in a central database.) , wherein receiving the user input comprises receiving a manually entered cellular site identifier entered into a first user interface presented via the cellular site image capture application ([0052] of Duff states that “rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system (“GPS”) receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number.” In other words, the field worker can manually input the work site identification number as recited in the claim. Further, [0058] describes “detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification . . . allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.” And [0059] concludes, “Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools . . . .”); authenticating the specific cellular site based on the user input, on location information associated with the UE, and on information stored for the specific cellular site ([0058] Of course, while an interface such as shown in FIG. 4 can allow a user to identify and correct images to be submitted, it is also possible that the disclosed technology could be implemented to be able to allow for automatic detection of issues in addition to, or as an alternative to, manual verification such as described above. For example, the disclosed technology could be configured to automatically acquire location information (e.g., from a GPS receiver in a field worker device) at the time an image is captured, then send that information to the server at the time the image is uploaded, thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict. [0059] Such metadata could be provided by the field worker using standard data input tools (e.g., text fields, radio buttons, selection menus, etc), or could be automatically populated in a manner similar to that described previously (e.g., location information could automatically be populated in an input form using a GPS receiver in a field worker's mobile device).); based at least in part on the authenticating, enabling, through the cellular site image capture application, an image capture feature of the cellular site image capture application ([0058] For example, the disclosed technology could be configured to automatically acquire location information (e.g., from a GPS receiver in a field worker device) at the time an image is captured, then send that information to the server at the time the image is uploaded, thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict.) on a second user interface presented via the cellular site image capture application (Figure 4 and the associated paragraphs, e.g., [0058]; the interface of Figure 4 does not show an input for manually entering information); capturing, through the cellular site image capture application, an image of the specific cellular site ([0058] Of course, while an interface such as shown in FIG. 4 can allow a user to identify and correct images to be submitted,); and following the capturing, disabling, through the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature.
Duff discloses each of the recited “the user input, on location information associated with the UE, and on information stored for the specific cellular site.” However, Duff does not require authenticating the specific cellular site based on each and every of these elements at the same time, as recited. Authentication of this specific cellular site would be obvious to try under MPEP § 2143(I)(E) because: (1) at the relevant time, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art, which may include a design need or market pressure to solve a problem ([0058] thereby allowing verification that the location where the image was captured is consistent with the location of the component(s) it purports to depict); (2) there had been a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem (each of the recited elements are found in Duff and are used in combination [0052], [0058]); (3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (Duff discloses each of these elements in various combinations); and (4) whatever additional findings based on the Graham factual inquiries may be necessary, in view of the facts of the case under consideration, to explain a conclusion of obviousness.
Duff discloses closing out the work file at the completion of the task ([0044] Continuing with the discussion of FIG. 13, in step eight of the method depicted in that figure, the worker navigates to a file upload page of the website (1314). Many field reports require certain files to be uploaded in addition to, or as part of, a submitted form. These files are often referred to as closeout files and are useful in order for the company to consider the case closed.) Duff does not explicitly disclose disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Gren teaches: following the capturing, disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature (Abstract - In one example, a plurality of image frames captured by a digital camera unit is received. It is determined that a condition is met that requires a switch between image capture states. In response, automatic adjustment of at least one image capture parameter without user input is enabled or disabled.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Duff to include the feature of disabling the image capture feature and a combination of Duff with Gren renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., electronics engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., disabling the capture feature after the capturing to improve energy consumption, closing out of project, etc.).
Regarding claim 11, Duff teaches: wherein receiving the user input comprises receiving a cellular site identifier or a cellular site location ([0052] For example, rather than simply relying on a field worker to enter information required for a daily or closeout report, some implementations of the disclosed technology could support functionality for populating some or all of that information automatically. This could be done through the use of a field worker device's global positioning system ("GPS") receiver to automatically populate fields related to location, such as state of work site, address of work site, zip code of work sites, or work site identification number.).
Regarding claim 13, Duff teaches: enabling, by the cellular site image capture application, entry of supplementary information associated with a captured image ([0057] To facilitate this type of interaction, the disclosed technology could be implemented to provide an interface which would allow a field worker both to select an image to upload and to indicate which image requirement that image is satisfying (e.g. `Left Side Component A`, `Right Side Component B`).).
Regarding claim 14, Duff teaches: sending, by the UE, the captured image to an image storage system ([0031] As will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art, a website used to implement the disclosed technology could require significant amounts of physical memory in which to store data. To address this need, a system implemented using the disclosed technology can comprise a database accessible via the website and used for storing all necessary forms, information, and files in an organized manner such that they may be retrieved by the website at any time. The exact physical manifestation of such a database may vary in from embodiment to embodiment, as there are many methods of mass physical memory storage known in the art of internet websites.).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duff in view of Gren and further in view of Non-patent Literature entitled, “Wake and unlock iPhone” (hereinafter “Apple”)
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Duff and Gren does not teach: wherein the disabling comprises disabling the image capture feature responsive to activation of a UE lock screen, change in a UE location, passage of a predetermined time period, or activation of another UE application, service, or feature.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Apple teaches: wherein the disabling comprises disabling the image capture feature responsive to activation of a UE lock screen, change in a UE location, passage of a predetermined time period, or activation of another UE application, service, or feature (p. 1 iPhone turns off the display to save power, locks for security, and goes to sleep when you’re not using it. You can quickly wake and unlock iPhone when you want to use it again.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Duff to include the feature of disabling the image capture feature responsive to activation of the lock screen and a combination of Duff and Gren with Apple renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., electronics engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., having the user interface on when the image capture feature is enabled and turning off the display when the feature is disabled.).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Duff and Gren does not teach: wherein the capturing includes receiving input through a user interface of the cellular site image capture application, the cellular site image capture application presenting the user interface while the image capture feature is enabled and ceasing to present the user interface when the image capture feature is disabled.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Apple teaches: wherein the capturing includes receiving input through a user interface of the cellular site image capture application, the cellular site image capture application presenting the user interface while the image capture feature is enabled and ceasing to present the user interface when the image capture feature is disabled (p. 1 iPhone turns off the display to save power, locks for security, and goes to sleep when you’re not using it. You can quickly wake and unlock iPhone when you want to use it again.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Duff to include the feature of presenting the interface while the user interface is enabled and ceasing when it is disabled and a combination of Duff and Gren with Apple renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., electronics engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., having the user interface on when the image capture feature is enabled and turning off the display when the feature is disabled.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 12 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The combination of Duff, Gren, and Apple does not render obvious “following the capturing, disabling, by the cellular site image capture application, the image capture feature” in combination with “wherein the capturing includes receiving input through a user interface of the cellular site image capture application, the cellular site image capture application presenting the user interface while the image capture feature is enabled and ceasing to present the user interface when the image capture feature is disabled.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Publication No. 2013/0083977 (Jackson) regarding retrieving images
U.S. Publication No. 2014/0240524 (Julia) regarding a system and method for remotely monitoring and/or viewing images from a camera or video device
U.S. Publication No. 2016/0307366 (Priest) regarding virtualized site survey systems and methods for cell sites
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN BARRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0201. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am EST to 5:00pm 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, Jinsong HU can be reached at (571) 272-3965. 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.
/JAB/ Examiner, Art Unit 2643
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643