DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This non-final office action is in response to the Request for Continuing Examination communication filed by the Applicant on 30 September 2025. Claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-4 are pending and considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claimed limitations, as per method Claim 1, include the steps of:
a processor; an input device; a display; a machine-readable storage device;
said machine-readable storage device comprising a machine readable set of health questions;
a machine-readable database of user health profiles including user responses to said machine-readable set of health questions;
a machine readable rule set;
a machine-readable database of healthcare providers;
a database of user-uploaded documents, including at least one of journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and hand-written notes;
said machine readable storage device further comprising machine readable instructions which, when executed by the processor,
prompt a user to answer a series of questions;
store said user's responses to said series of questions in said machine-readable database of user health profile;
prompt the user to input or upload one or more of said journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and handwritten notes;
store said user-uploaded documents in said database of user-uploaded documents;
assess said user's responses to said series of questions and said user input journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs and/or handwritten notes against said machine-readable rule set to make one or more preliminary diagnoses and action recommendations;
transmit to said display said preliminary and action recommendations;
access said database of healthcare providers and make a recommendation to said user of one or more of said healthcare providers based on said one or more preliminary diagnoses;
initiate and manage online communications between said user and a selected healthcare provider; and
provide user and user-authorized healthcare provider access to said user information and said user-uploaded documents.
Examiner Note: underlined elements indicate additional elements of the claimed invention identified as performing the steps of the claimed invention.
Under Step One of the analysis under the Mayo framework, claims 1, 3, and 4 is/are drawn to a system (i.e., a machine/manufacture). As such, claims 1, 3, and 4 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention.
Under Step 2A Prong One of the analysis under the Mayo framework the claim(s) are determined to recite(s) the judicial exception of user health profiles including user responses to a set of health questions; a rule set; a database of healthcare providers; user-uploaded documents, including at least one of journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and hand-written notes; prompt a user to answer a series of questions; store said user's responses to said series of questions in said user health profile; prompt the user to input or upload one or more of said journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and handwritten notes; assess said user's responses to said series of questions and said user input journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs and/or handwritten notes against said machine-readable rule set to make one or more preliminary diagnoses and action recommendations; transmit said preliminary and action recommendations; access information related to healthcare providers and make a recommendation to said user of one or more of said healthcare providers based on said one or more preliminary diagnoses; manage communications between said user and a selected healthcare provider; and provide user and user-authorized healthcare provider access to said user information and said user-uploaded documents.
This judicial exception is similar to abstract ideas related to certain methods of organizing human activity such as managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
Under Step 2A Prong Two of the analysis under the Mayo Framework, the judicial exception expressed as the steps of the instant claims is not integrated into a practical application because the claims only recite one additional element, the element of using a processor or computing system including a local registry or memory to perform the steps of the claimed abstract idea. The processor is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions to perform the claimed steps of the invention), and therefore the abstract idea amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element of performing the inventive steps with a generic computer does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application.
Under step 2B of the Mayo analysis framework the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations of performing the steps with a computer processor, a display module, and a memory storing machine executable instructions represents insignificant data gathering and data processing steps requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry. Applicant’s published written description paragraph [52] recites “computer system/server 12 in computing node 10 is shown in the form of a general-purpose computing device. The components of computer system/server 12 may include, but are not limited to, processing units 16, a system memory 28, and a bus 18 that couples various system components including system memory 28 to processing units,” written description paragraph [55] recites “System memory 28 can include computer system readable media in the form of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) 30 and/or cache memory 32. Computer system/server 12 may further include other removable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile computer system storage media. By way of example only, storage system 34 can be provided for reading from and writing to a non-removable, non-volatile magnetic media (not shown and typically called a “hard drive”),” written description paragraph [56] recites “set of program modules 42, may be stored in system memory 28 by way of example, and not limitation, as well as an operating system, one or more application programs, other program modules, and program data. Each of the operating system, one or more application programs, other program modules, and program data or some combination thereof, may include an implementation of a networking environment,” written description paragraph [57] recites “Computer system/server 12 may also communicate with one or more external devices 14, such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a display 24, etc.; one or more devices that enable a user to interact with computer system/server 12; and/or any devices (e.g., network card, modem, etc.) that enable computer system/server 12 to communicate with one or more other computing devices. Such communication can occur via Input/Output (I/O) interfaces,” and written description paragraph [58] recites “computing environment 50 comprises one or more computing nodes (e.g., computing node 10) with which local computing devices used by consumers, such as, for example, personal digital assistant (PDA) or cellular telephone 54A, desktop computer 54B, and/or laptop computer 54C may communicate. Computing nodes may communicate with one another. They may be grouped (not shown) physically or virtually, in one or more networks, such as Private, Community, Public, or Hybrid clouds.” Thus the claimed inventive steps are performed by generic or general purpose computing systems executing well known and understood instructions and processes which do not comprise significantly more than a known computing system, or comprise improvements to another technological field.
Further, as per MPEP 2106, and TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) ("It is well-settled that mere recitation of concrete, tangible components is insufficient to confer patent eligibility to an otherwise abstract idea") and as per Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 792 F.3d 1363, 1366, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015) ("An abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer") simply performing the steps of an abstract idea by a computing apparatus does not make an inventive concept statutorily eligible. Therefore, it is clear from Applicants’ specification that the elements and modules in the claims require no more than a generic computer (e.g., a general-purpose computing device) to perform generic computer functions (e.g., accessing, transmitting/receiving, sorting, and storing data) that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known in the industry. None of the limitations, considered as a whole and as an ordered combination provide eligibility, because the steps of the claims simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea with routine, conventional activity.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer, generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering).
Dependent claims 3 and 4 are directed to the judicial exception as explained above for Claim 1, and are further directed to limitations directed to the prompting of users to upload a wide range of documents, provide support group recommendations to users, and generate chronologically organized user mood and event timelines. These limitations or processes are considered to be executed by the general purpose computing system as explained above, and therefore do not result in the claimed invention being directed to a practical application or comprise significantly more than the identified abstract idea.
Dependent claims 3 and 4 do not add more to the abstract idea of independent Claim 1 and therefore are rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 based on a rationale similar to the claims from which they depend.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Motura et al. (20180158538 in view of Gilon et al. (20170024656).
Claim 1: Motura discloses a computer system comprising:
a processor; an input device; a display; a machine-readable storage device ([32 “module of a processing subsystem configured to interface with a native data collection application executing on a mobile computing device (e.g., smartphone, tablet, personal data assistant (PDA), personal music player, vehicle, head-mounted wearable computing device, wrist-mounted wearable computing device, etc.) of the individual, in order to retrieve communication-related data pertaining to the individual,” 34 “ computing system can be implemented in one or more of a processing module of the mobile device, a personal computer, a remote server, a cloud-based computing system, a computing module of any other suitable computing device (e.g., mobile computing device, wearable computing device, etc.), and any other suitable computing module. In transmitting the log of use dataset, a communication module (e.g., a hardware communication module associated with the communication application) can transmit data to the computing system by way of a wired and/or wireless data link,” 39, 51 “storage modules,”]);
said machine-readable storage device ([51 “storage modules,”]) comprising a machine readable set of health questions ([48 “surveys configured to assess states of anxiety can include surveys derived from one or more of: a general anxiety disorder (GAD) scale (e.g., a GAD-7 scale); a questionnaire for screening, monitoring, and measuring anxiety severity according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) criteria for anxiety; a daily assessment of symptoms-anxiety (DAS-A) questionnaire,” 49, 50]); Examiner Note: Examiner under a broadest reasonable interpretation, considers the implementation of surveys based upon health related questionnaires to be the provision of health related questions.
a machine-readable database of healthcare providers ([74 “generate information pertaining to the individual and information pertaining to performance of the therapeutic entity, which can be used to improve interactions between individuals and therapeutic entities,” 88 “individual's licensed therapist and contact information; the individual's patient care provider and contact information,” 104 “include blocks for generation of reports for licensed therapist and/or patient care providers analogous to those for generation of a report for a coaching entity,” 105]);
said machine readable storage device further comprising machine readable instructions which ([51 “storage modules,”]), when executed by the processor,
prompt a user to answer a series of questions ([47 “a mood/depression survey; and a recent care survey (e.g., covering questions regarding hospitalization and psychological care). However, the set of surveys can include any other suitable surveys (e.g., BDI, HDI, CES-D, PHQ-8, etc.) or adaptations thereof,” 48 “surveys configured to assess states of anxiety can include surveys derived from one or more of: a general anxiety disorder (GAD) scale (e.g., a GAD-7 scale); a questionnaire for screening, monitoring, and measuring anxiety severity according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) criteria for anxiety; a daily assessment of symptoms-anxiety (DAS-A) questionnaire,” 49, 50]);
store said user's responses to said series of questions in said machine-readable database of user health profile ([109 “native application can prompt the individual to create a profile or account. In the example, the account can be stored locally on the individual's mobile computing device 209, in a process as shown in FIGS. 3B, 5D, and 7, and/or remotely. Furthermore, data processed or produced by modules of the system 200 can be configured to facilitate storage of data locally (e.g., on the patent's mobile computing device, in a remote database), or in any other suitable manner,”]);
store said user-uploaded documents in said database of user-uploaded documents ([109 “individual's data can be encrypted and uploaded to the remote database once a secure Internet connection is established,”]);
transmit to said display said preliminary and action recommendations ([84 “rendering information from the report to the coaching entity associated with the individual, thereby enabling the coach to facilitate provision of a therapeutic intervention for the individual by way of at least one of the computing system and the mobile device of the individual,” 85 “enhance the coaching entity's ability to deliver appropriate care to the individual(s) associated with the coaching entity, to decrease the coaching entity's burden, and to increase the efficiency of the coaching entity,”]);
access said database of healthcare providers and make a recommendation to said user of one or more of said healthcare providers based on said one or more preliminary diagnoses ([37, 68 “therapeutic entity can be automatically matched to the individual based upon a matching module (e.g., as described in relation to Blocks S180 and S190 below), upon election of opening communication by the individual. In still alternative variations, a therapeutic entity (e.g., matched to the individual, unmatched to the individual) can be automatically connected to the individual for a period of communication without election by the individual,” 77-79]);
initiate and manage online communications between said user and a selected healthcare provider ([67 “functions to provide the individual with an avenue for receiving therapeutic communication with empathetic listening, intended to improve the individual's mental health state (e.g., in the short term, in the short term and long term, in the long term, etc.). Block S150 preferably includes providing the individual with an option to establish communication with a therapeutic entity, wherein conversing with the therapeutic entity serves as a form of therapy to improve the psychological state of the individual,” 68-77]); and
provide user and user-authorized healthcare provider access to said user information and said user-uploaded documents ([99 “report is rendered within an application (e.g., web accessible application, mobile application, etc.) that the coaching entity has privileges of access to. In variations, the application can provide the coaching entity with online tools for interacting with one or more individuals associated with the coaching entity,”]).
Motura does not explicitly disclose, however Gilon further discloses:
a machine-readable database of user health profiles including user responses to said machine-readable set of health questions ([147 “recommendation engine may be capable of predicting the user's needs based on the user query, as previously described. In some embodiments, the recommendation engine can predict the user's needs based on: (1) the user's profile, (2) information obtained directly or indirectly from the user,” 156 “input data may comprise questions, answers, comments, and/or insights in the form of text, audio, video, and/or photographs that are (1) provided by the plurality of users and (2) associated with the one or more life events,”]);
a machine readable rule set ([137 “extracted key feature(s) may be used to generate the recommendation rule corresponding to the explicit declaration,”]);
a database of user-uploaded documents, including at least one of journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and hand-written notes ([101 “user input may include questions, comments, or statements made by one or more users. Different users may provide different input, and the input may relate to any subject matter,” 147 “recommendation engine may be capable of predicting the user's needs based on the user query, as previously described. In some embodiments, the recommendation engine can predict the user's needs based on: (1) the user's profile, (2) information obtained directly or indirectly from the user,” 154, 156 “input data may comprise questions, answers, comments, and/or insights in the form of text, audio, video, and/or photographs that are (1) provided by the plurality of users and (2) associated with the one or more life events,” 157 “users may interact with the set of visual objects on the graphical displays using at least one of the following input devices: a mouse, a keyboard, a touchscreen monitor, a voice recognition software, or a virtual reality and/or augmented reality headset,” 173]);
prompt the user to input or upload one or more of said journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and handwritten notes ([156 “input data may comprise questions, answers, comments, and/or insights in the form of text, audio, video, and/or photographs that are (1) provided by the plurality of users and (2) associated with the one or more life events,” 157 “users may interact with the set of visual objects on the graphical displays using at least one of the following input devices: a mouse, a keyboard, a touchscreen monitor, a voice recognition software, or a virtual reality and/or augmented reality headset,” 224 “Notifications 2506d may be configured to manage the pending notifications per user. Notifications to a user may be generated under a variety of circumstances (e.g., when new insights are received, a reminder that a next milestone is upcoming, when messages are received from other users, etc.). Notifications 2506d may further include software/hardware interaction with different push notifications mechanisms (e.g. on mobile devices, tablets, etc.),” 225 “Inter-user communication 2506e can allow users to interact with one another. Users may interact by sending messages, sending ‘hugs’, or becoming ‘friends’ with one another. Inter-user communication 2506e may be configured to facilitate any of the above interactions,”]);
assess said user's responses to said series of questions and said user input journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs and/or handwritten notes against said machine-readable rule set to make one or more preliminary diagnoses and action recommendations ([18 “timing of the delivering of the feeds may be determined using a predictive model to assess future milestones of the SLT event. In some embodiments, a quantity, a type, and/or a source of the feeds may be based upon a determination of the user's profile,” 150 “user's journey may also change because the disease may change its course (for example, the user's body may have varying responses to chemotherapy treatment). The user's mood may also change frequently and erratically due to anxiety, pain, depression, etc. Furthermore, the user's journey may be influenced by other personal non-clinical events,” 156 “input data may comprise questions, answers, comments, and/or insights in the form of text, audio, video, and/or photographs that are (1) provided by the plurality of users and (2) associated with the one or more life events,” 157 “users may interact with the set of visual objects on the graphical displays using at least one of the following input devices: a mouse, a keyboard, a touchscreen monitor, a voice recognition software, or a virtual reality and/or augmented reality headset,” 202, 233 “Milestone analytics 2510b may be further configured to suggest new milestones to be added to the system by analyzing the users' responses,”]).
Therefore it would be obvious for Moturu to operate a machine-readable database of user health profiles including user responses to said machine-readable set of health questions, a machine readable rule set, a database of user-uploaded documents, including at least one of journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and hand-written notes, prompt the user to input or upload one or more of said journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs, and handwritten notes, and assess said user's responses to said series of questions and said user input journal entries, diary entries, drawings, photographs and/or handwritten notes against said machine-readable rule set to make one or more preliminary diagnoses and action recommendations as per the steps of Gilon in order to collect and process user interactions with respect to the provision of questionnaires which include a variety of input data including images and text related information for the purpose of analyzing user emotional states and other relevant statuses and result in the determination of diagnoses and therefore improve the provision of treatment as well as likely resulting in positive treatment outcomes.
Claim 3: Moturu in view of Gilon discloses the computer system as for claim 1 above and Moturu further discloses wherein the computer code further includes instructions for causing the processor to:
make support group recommendations to a plurality of users ([69 “the individual can be connected with the same therapeutic entity across all instances of communication, or can alternatively be connected with different therapeutic entities across different instances of communication. Furthermore, variations of Block S150 can include enabling communication with parties comprising multiple individuals and/or multiple therapeutic entities (e.g., in a group therapy session format),”];
introduce recommended support group users and facilitate and/or manage communications between recommended support group users who accept system recommended support group participation ([69 “the individual can be connected with the same therapeutic entity across all instances of communication, or can alternatively be connected with different therapeutic entities across different instances of communication. Furthermore, variations of Block S150 can include enabling communication with parties comprising multiple individuals and/or multiple therapeutic entities (e.g., in a group therapy session format),” 79 “function to establish a relationship between one or more therapeutic entities and one or more individuals, thereby providing an avenue for individuals to receive therapy from familiar, but otherwise anonymous entities. Additionally or alternatively, Block S190 can facilitate automatic establishment of a period of communication between the individual and a matched therapeutic entity,” 83 “the coaching entity can be the same entity or, alternatively, a different entity from the therapeutic entity (e.g., listening entity),” 102 “session can be implemented within the mobile application associated with the method 100, using a video chat feature of the mobile application. Additionally or alternatively, as shown in FIG. 11B (right), the individual can be presented with multiple licensed therapists as options, and can elect a specific licensed therapist he/he would like to engage with,”]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moturu et al. (20280158538) in view Gilon et al. (20170024656) and in further view of Shriberg et al. (20210110894).
Claim 4: Moturu in view of Gilon discloses the computer system as for claim 1 above and Moturu does not explicitly disclose however Shriberg discloses wherein the computer code further includes instructions for causing the processor to:
generate chronologically-organized user mood and event timeline ([391 “response is then divided up into discrete time segments (at 3382). The length of these time segments is configurable, and in one embodiment, they are set to a three second value, as most spoken concepts are formed in this length of time. The base weights for each of the models are then modified based upon model confidence levels, for each time period,”]) using user-input information and present said chronologically-organized user-mood and event timeline to said user ([284, 285 “machine learning that models health states directly include sentiment analysis, semantic analysis, language modeling, word/document embeddings and clustering, topic modeling, discourse analysis, syntactic analysis, and dialogue analysis. Models do not need to be constrained to one type of information. A model may contain information for example from both sentiment and topic based features,” 286-288, 342, 359 “topic analyzer 2721, various emotion analyzers 2723 (anxiety, joy, sadness, etc.), sentiment analyzer 2725, engagement analyzer 2727, and arousal analyzer 2729. Some of these analyzers may function similarly in the other models; for example the NLP model 2015 already includes a sentiment model 2551, however the sentiment analyzer 2725 in the descriptive features 2018 module operates independently from the other models, and includes different input variables,” 564 “real time screening or monitoring results may be delivered to the provider in real time. The provider may be able to adaptively screen the patient about high risk topics, based on the collected real-time results,” Figs. 60, 61]).
Therefore it would be obvious for Moturu to generate chronologically-organized user mood and event timeline using user-input information and present said chronologically-organized user-mood and event timeline to said user as per the steps of Shriberg to collect sufficient interactive data and information by a variety of sensing techniques including user related and collected input parameters and generate mood and event timelines for analysis of user related information and the provision of health related feedback to the user as well as facilitate treatment provision.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
After careful review of Applicant’s remarks/arguments filed on 30 September 2025, Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 3 and 4 have been fully considered and are discussed below.
Examiner acknowledges Applicants submittal of an IDS with respect to the instant application and as well no amendments or arguments were submitted. Examiner notes the term profile only occurs three times in the written description and the term healthcare provider occurs numerous times however is discloses in different contexts and is related to mental and physical health. After considering the submitted references Examiner concludes they are related to the instant invention but do not affect the previously determined rejection of all pending claims. Therefore the rejection of the instant invention under 35 USC 101 and 35 USC 103 is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Please see attached References Cited form 892.
See Gnanasambanda et al. (20230052573) for disclosures related to the autonomous generation of care plans personalized for patients including action instructions based patient related data. See at least paras. [131]-[177].
See Davis et al. (20210345925) for disclosures related to the identification of treatments responsive to health risks determined by the implementation of feature vectors with respect to user provided words and actions. See at least paras. [31]-[49].
See Chin et al. (20210057106) for disclosures related to the collection of patient related information including lab results, patient related data, and related machine learning calculation data and generation of a patient profile. See at least paras. [36]-[60].
See DeBrouwer et al. (20200286600) for disclosures related to the aggregation of vital sign data, diagnostic test results, medical data, and user parameters into a single medical record by the periodic reception of vital signs and diagnostic data. See at least paras. [70]-[116].
See Abbruzzese (20160358501) for disclosures related to the detection of somatic symptom disorder by collection of a wide variety of data including mental health related information and related disease information. See at least paras. [24]-[43].
See Williams et al. (20050117527) for disclosures related to the detection and provision of treatments to members of a care group with respect to physical or mental conditions. See at least paras. [170]-[202].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID STOLTENBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-3472. The examiner can normally be reached on generally 8am to 8pm EST M-F.
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, Kambiz Abdi can be reached on 571 272 6702. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID J STOLTENBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3685