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. 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- 4 , 8, 10- 11 , 15, and 17- 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du ( US 20170278421 A1 ) in view of Abbassi (US 20140278590 A1) and Cao (US 20220019455 A1) . Regarding Claim 1, Du teaches a method of virtual resource container running model for asynchronous content delivery using a container management engine ( Du discloses, “The grading system comprises a processing system; and a memory, the memory containing instructions that, when executed by the processing system, configure the processing system to: receive a program code submitted by a user, wherein the received program code is the user solution to the computing assignment; activate at least one code processing engine, wherein each code processing engine is a secured isolated execution environment …,” ¶ 0013 , and “ The grading system 130 is configured to authenticate a user of a user device 120 and to assign an assignment to an authenticated user . The assignment to be assigned can be selected based on the user's level and/or curriculum of the course or class the user participates , ” ¶ 00 23 . The claimed “ container management engine ” is mapped to the disclosed “ grading system ” , which activates code processing engines that are secured isolated execution environments, mapped to virtual resource container s. The “grading system” provides a container that runs and grade programs completed and submitted by a student. This mapping is consistent with the specification, which discusses a scoring system for completing missions. Spec. paragraph 83 . Du also discloses “At S420, upon authentication, an assignment is selected, assigned, and provided to the user ,” ¶ 0063 . Here, the assignment is delivered to a student asynchronously upon authentication of the user. ) , comprising: selecting a container management engine as a computing task running environment ( Du discloses, “ activate at least one code processing engine, wherein each code processing engine is a secured isolated execution environment …,” ¶ 0013 , and “ Moreover, in an embodiment, there may be a plurality of grading systems operating as described hereinabove and configured to either have one as a standby, to share the load between them, or to split the functions between them . In a further embodiment, various elements of the grading system 130 may be implemented as stand-alone elements, ” ¶ 00 3 3 . A grading system , mapped to container management engine , is selected from “a plurality of grading systems”. ) ; streaming synchronous content on a first interface of a user device of a plurality of user devices, wherein the synchronous content includes a set of interactive queries accessible on the plurality of user devices ( Du discloses, “The user device 120 is typically operable by a user who is required to solve predefined assignments . In an embodiment, such a predefined assignment is related to developing and coding big data algorithms. A big data algorithm is designed to provide insights on a specific problem. Insights by their nature are not definitive results,” ¶ 0021 , “Upon assigning an assignment , a grading workplace is created. Creating the grading workplace includes at least allocating storage in the code repository 140, instantiating a secured isolated execution environment for code execution, providing a user interface for writing a program code in a programmable language, and allocating/importing code libraries to allow the program to run seamlessly,” ¶ 0024 . and “At S420, upon authentication, an assignment is selected, assigned, and provided to the user ,” ¶ 0063 . The claimed “ synchronous content ” is mapped to the set of disclosed “pre-defined assignments” that is the same for a set of users . Paragraph 34 of the present application’s specification states that “ he computing task running environment 102 provides synchronous content that is the common content including interactive queries for all the end users ,” indicating that the synchronous content must be the same for all users. ) ; receiving a selection of an interactive program from the first interface based on the synchronous content ( Du discloses, “Upon assigning an assignment , a grading workplace is created. Creating the grading workplace includes at least allocating storage in the code repository 140, instantiating a secured isolated execution environment for code execution, providing a user interface for writing a program code in a programmable language, and allocating/importing code libraries to allow the program to run seamlessly,” ¶ 0024 , and “At S420, upon authentication, an assignment is selected, assigned, and provided to the user ,” ¶ 0063 . Each of the assignments is interactive because it includes an interactive wor k space . ) ; designing a virtual resource container running model for the container management engine in response to the received selection ( Du discloses, “ Upon assigning an assignment, a grading workplace is created . Creating the grading workplace includes at least allocating storage in the code repository 140, instantiating a secured isolated execution environment for code execution, providing a user interface for writing a program code in a programmable language, and allocating/importing code libraries to allow the program to run seamlessly ,” ¶ 00 24 . ) ; creating a virtual machine instance based on the received selection ( Du discloses, “ In an embodiment, the secured isolated execution environment for code execution is realized by a virtual machine or a software container, ” ¶ 00 25 , and “The secured isolated execution environment is utilized only to run the code developed by the user as part of her/his assignment ,” ¶ 0026 .) , wherein: received selection comprises selection of at least one interactive program, the virtual machine instance includes a plurality of harbors ( Du discloses, “Upon assigning an assignment , a grading workplace is created,” ¶ 0024 , and “Any code uploaded to the repository 240 can be set with a version identifier by a version control mechanism (not shown). The code is then pushed to the grading engine 230, which instantiates a code processing engine 230 for executing the code in a secured isolated execution environment. The code processing engine 230 can be realized as a virtual machine, a software container , and the like. In some configurations, a pool of code processing engines 230 are pre-instantiated, active, and ready to use,” ¶ 0038 . The claimed “harbors” are mapped to the disclosed pool of code processing engines (which can be implemented as containers) that can be nested within a larger individual secured isolated execution environment , or virtual machine); each harbor includes a plurality of containers, a harbor agent, a plurality of skippers and a plurality of checkers ( Du discloses, “In an embodiment, the grading performed by the grading engine 220 is an approximate grading. To perform the approximate grading, the grading engine 220 is configured with a fuzzy logic unit 225. The fuzzy logic unit 225 is designed to provide a grade or score for the received answer (Y) based on a collection of heuristics (or functions) and the type of algorithm being solved. The grade or score can be at any scale (e.g., 0-1, 1-10, 1-100, etc.),” ¶ 0043 . The claimed “ plurality of checkers ” is mapped to the disclosed heuristics or functions belonging to the fuzzy logic unit. The heuristics and functions interact with each of the disclosed “code processing engines” when grading; thus, it maps to the claimed “each harbor including a plurality… of checkers”.) ; analyzing the selection received on an interface of the virtual machine instance using a plurality of checkers ( Du discloses, “ In an embodiment, the grading performed by the grading engine 220 is an approximate grading. To perform the approximate grading, the grading engine 220 is configured with a fuzzy logic unit 225. The fuzzy logic unit 225 is designed to provide a grade or score for the received answer (Y) based on a collection of heuristics (or functions) and the type of algorithm being solved. The grade or score can be at any scale (e.g., 0-1, 1-10, 1-100, etc.). ” ¶ 00 43 . ) ; wherein the checkers are adapted to compare the selection received with a set of results stored within each harbor of the plurality of harbors using machine learning algorithms ( Du discloses, “ In another embodiment, the fuzzy logic unit 225 implements a collection of machine learning metrics in order to grade the results answer (Y) , ” ¶ 00 50 .) ; and generating an output, using the machine learning algorithms, based on a match of the selection received with the set of results, wherein the output comprises a result value and a set of instructions to be performed on the virtual machine instance ( Du discloses, “ Expected results Y′ provided by a model trained by the grading engine 230 on the input dataset (X) are compared to the received answer (Y). For example, a mean error for each of Y and Y′ can be computed and, if the mean errors for the user-provided answer Y are no greater than those of the reference solution Y′, then a maximum grade will be determined, ” ¶ 00 51 , and “At S470, the determined grade is reported to the user and/or saved in a database. In an embodiment, the report may be sent as immediate feedback in real-time,” ¶ 0068 , and “executing the program code in the at least one activated code processing engine to produce an answer; determining a grade for the answer based on an expected answer and an approximate grading function , wherein the approximate grading function is determined based on a type of the computing assignment; and returning the grade to the user,” Abstract. ). Du does not teach that the set of queries is interactive or accessible on a plurality of user devices . Du also does not teach that each harbor includes a plurality of containers, a harbor agent, a plurality of skippers . . . . However, Abbassi teaches that a set of queries is interactive and accessible from a plurality of user devices ( Abbassi discloses, “…providing user display or other output and receiving input from user interactive selections or queries/requests , via any of various well known heterogeneous input hardware/software integrated devices, for creation of a graph database, and/or queries of the graph database via the user computing device. According to an exemplary embodiment, various versions of the exemplary software program, which may be, e.g., but is not limited to, a browser based application …,” ¶ 0083 .) Du in view of Abbassi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of online computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du to incorporate the teachings of Abbassi and provide that the set of queries is interactive and accessible from a plurality of user devices. Doing so would help allow more user accessibility for the system ( Abbassi discloses, “Users as shown in diagram 120 may access applications, in an exemplary embodiment via a network illustrated by the cloud…,” ¶ 0086 .), and also allow each user to customize their selection of queries. Du in view of Abbassi does not teach that each harbor includes a plurality of containers, a harbor agent, a plurality of skippers . . . . However, Cao teaches that each harbor includes a plurality of containers, a harbor agent, a plurality of skippers ( Cao discloses : Cao teaches each harbor includes a plurality of containers, stating “In embodiments, image registry 190 comprises a Harbor registry . Harbor is an open-source container image registry that secures images with role-based access control, scans, images for vulnerabilities, and signs images as trusted ,” ¶ 0043 , “ The container image registry manages container images for deploying containers in a host cluster, the host cluster including hosts and a virtualization layer executing on hardware platforms of the hosts, the virtualization layer supporting execution of virtual machines (VMs),” ¶ 0063. “ Image registry 190 includes a Docker registry API 302, a Harbor management API 304, a registry authentication (auth) service 306 , support services 308 , a Docker registry 310, and a database 314. Image registry 190 maintains state information, including automation tokens 316, robot accounts 318A, SSO accounts 318B, and projects 320,” ¶ 0044 , “ Docker registry 310 is the central component that stores and maintains images in storage volume 312 . Support services 308 include extended service components , such as image scanning, image signing, image replication, and the like , ” ¶ 00 45 . The claimed “ harbor agent ” is mapped to either the disclosed “ Harbor UI Client 336 ” or the disclosed “Registry Agent 330”, both from Fig. 3 . The claimed “ skipper ” is mapped to the disclosed “ support service ” , in light of the present application’s specification, which did not give a definition for the term “skipper”, but did provide an example as supporting services, stating “The skipper 308-1, 308-2 checks the state or health of the harbor 302-1,” ¶ 0078 . Paragraph 43 of Du already teaches the claimed “ checkers ”, mapped to its disclosed heuristics or functions belonging to the fuzzy logic unit to grade/check students’ assignments . After the combination of Du in view of Abbassi with Cao, Cao’s Harbor now includes the checkers from Du in view of Abbassi . ). Du in view of Abbassi , and Cao are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of containerized computing . Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi to incorporate the teachings of Cao and provide that each harbor includes a plurality of containers, a harbor agent, a plurality of skippers . Doing so would help provide more secure management for the overall system ( Cao discloses, “ Docker registry API 302 and Harbor management API 304 provide an interface to image registry 190. Docker registry API 302 provides an interface to clients for login to image registry 190 and, if authenticated and authorized, to push and/or pull images through Docker registry 310. Harbor management API 304 provides an interface to clients for management of image registry 190, including configuration of security policy, add/remove users in projects, add/remove projects, system configurations, and the like , ” ¶ 00 45 .). Claim 8 and Claim 1 5 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim , respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 1 (¶ 0070 of Du ) . Therefore, Claim 8 and Claim 15 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 1. Regarding Claim 3, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the virtual machine instance is hosted on cloud environment and wherein each harbor includes a plurality of docker containers hosted on the cloud environment ( Cao discloses, “FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a virtualized computing system 100 in which embodiments described herein may be implemented. System 100 includes a cluster of hosts 120 (“host cluster 118”) that may be constructed on server-grade hardware platforms such as an x86 architecture platforms,” ¶ 0020 , “In the example of FIG. 1, host cluster 118 is enabled as a ‘supervisor cluster,’ described further herein, and thus VMs executing on each host 120 include pod VMs 130 and native VMs 140,” ¶ 0023 , and “In embodiments, image registry 190 comprises a Harbor registry. Harbor is an open-source container image registry that secures images with role-based access control, scans, images for vulnerabilities, and signs images as trusted .” ¶ 0043 .). Du in view of Abbassi , and Cao are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of containerized computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi to incorporate the teachings of Cao and provide wherein the virtual machine instance is hosted on cloud environment and wherein the virtual machine instance is hosted on cloud environment and wherein each harbor includes a plurality of docker containers hosted on the cloud environment . Doing so would help allow easier user access for the system ( Cao discloses, “Users can access a container registry using a client of the container engine or through the Kubernetes using a Kubernetes secret,” ¶ 0002 .). Claim 10 and Claim 17 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim, respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 3. Therefore, Claim 10 and Claim 17 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 3. Regarding Claim 4, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1 , further comprising determining the interactive program, via a plurality of harbors, based on a plurality of attributes associated with the user device, wherein the plurality of attributes includes a level of skills, and/or educational background of an end user associated with the user device ( Du discloses “As part of the regular and instant grading feedback, the grading system may assign an easier or harder assignment depending on the user performances ,” ¶ 0069 . The easier or harder assignments correspond to different levels of skills for the user. ). Claim 11 and Claim 18 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim, respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 4. Therefore, Claim 11 and Claim 18 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 4. Claim s 2 , 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du (US 20170278421 A1) in view of Abbassi (US 20140278590 A1), Cao (US 20220019455 A1) , and Shannon (US 20230048589 A1). Regarding Claim 2, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1 . Du in view of Abbassi and Cao does not teach wherein the container management engine is configured to create the virtual machine instance for each end user using images of instances of virtual machines . However, Shannon teaches wherein the container management engine is configured to create the virtual machine instance for each end user using images of instances of virtual machines ( Shannon discloses , “ issuing each user an attestable pre-fabricated and signed virtualized environment on approved hardware that comes with functionality required for the user's role implemented as one of a set of virtual machine templates fashioned from a signed and approved pre-fabricated image , ” ¶ 00 07 .). Du in view of Abbassi and Cao , and Shannon are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of containerized computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi and Cao to incorporate the teachings of Shannon and provide wherein the container management engine is configured to create the virtual machine instance for each end user using images of instances of virtual machines . Doing so would help provide extra security for the overall system ( Shannon discloses, “ whereby each successive stage of software development uses trusted, secure virtual machines or containers (a container may be defined, but without limitation, as an operating system virtualization) ,” ¶ 0017 .). Claim 9 and Claim 16 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim, respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 2 . Therefore, Claim 9 and Claim 16 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 2 . Claim s 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du (US 20170278421 A1) in view of Abbassi (US 20140278590 A1), Cao (US 20220019455 A1) , and Nikam (US 20160274994 A1). Regarding Claim 5, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing communication between the plurality of harbors and the user device via the harbor agent ( Du discloses, “ network 110 is communicatively connected to a plurality of user devices 120-1 through 120-n (hereinafter referred to individually as a user device 120 and collectively as user devices 120, merely for simplicity purposes), a grading system 130, and a code repository 140 ,” ¶ 0020 . The network 110 allows communication between the user devices and the grading system and its components, including the code processing engines. ); receiving test inputs on the user device using the harbor agent; and providing the received selection from the user device to the harbor for processing via the container management engine ( Du discloses “The code is then pushed to the grading engine 230, which instantiates a code processing engine 230 for executing the code in a secured isolated execution environment ,” ¶ 0038 .). Du in view of Abbassi does not teach providing communication between the plurality of harbors and the user device via the harbor agent , and does not teach receiving test inputs on the user device using the harbor agent . However, Cao’s Fig. 3 teaches providing communication between the plurality of harbors and the user device via the harbor agent . (The claimed “ harbor agent ” is mapped to either the disclosed “Harbor UI Client 336” or the disclosed “Registry Agent 330”, both from Fig. 3 of Cao. Each of these agents provide communication with the Harbor registry and outside components.). Du in view of Abbassi , and Cao are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of containerized computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi to incorporate the teachings of Cao and provide communication between the plurality of harbors and the user device via the harbor agent . Doing so would help provide more secure management for the overall system ( Cao discloses, “Docker registry API 302 and Harbor management API 304 provide an interface to image registry 190. Docker registry API 302 provides an interface to clients for login to image registry 190 and, if authenticated and authorized, to push and/or pull images through Docker registry 310. Harbor management API 304 provides an interface to clients for management of image registry 190, including configuration of security policy, add/remove users in projects, add/remove projects, system configurations, and the like,” ¶ 0045 .). Du in view of Abbassi and Cao does not teach receiving test inputs on the user device using the harbor agent . However, Nikam teaches receiving test inputs on the user device using the harbor agent ( Nikam discloses, “Test code generator component 214 illustratively receives a task recorder input from task recorder 108 (shown in FIG. 1) that records the test inputs provided by testing user 122,” ¶ 0027 . After the combination of Du in view of Abbassi and Cao with Nikam , the test inputs from Nikam are recorded using the harbor agent from Du in view of Abbassi and Cao .) Du in view of Abbassi and Cao , and Nikam are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of online computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi and Cao to incorporate the teachings of Nikam and provide receiving test inputs on the user device using the harbor agent . Doing so would help ensure that the system works properly ( Nikam discloses, “During the process of customizing a base computing system to meet the needs of an end user organization, developers often perform incremental customizations, and then build and test the system to determine whether those customizations work properly,” ¶ 0004 .). Claim 12 and Claim 19 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim, respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 5. Therefore, Claim 12 and Claim 19 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 5. Claim s 6 , 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du (US 20170278421 A1) in view of Abbassi (US 20140278590 A1), Cao (US 20220019455 A1) , and Bell (US 10353729 B1). Regarding Claim 6, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying an anomaly in the harbor based on periodically receiving a status check response from the plurality of skippers; and providing the identified anomaly to the container management engine for rectification ( Du discloses “To this end, the grading system 130 is configured to capture errors from the interpreter or compiler running the code in the secured execution environment (e.g., the virtual containers) and to return such errors to the respective user device 120. The errors may include, but are not limited to, compilation errors, debugging messages, runtime errors, and the like ,” ¶ 0029 .). Du in view of Abbassi and Cao does not teach identifying said anomaly based on periodically receiving a status check response from the plurality of skippers; and providing the identified anomaly to the container management engine for rectification . However, Bell teaches identifying an anomaly based on periodically receiving a status check response from the plurality of skippers; and providing the identified anomaly to the container management engine for rectification ( Bell discloses, “Error monitor 310 generally monitors virtual machines 142 during startup and regular operations to determine whether a virtual machine 142 has experienced system errors that may require remediation . … Until the timer expires, error monitor 310 can periodically request status information from the virtual machine 142 . If error monitor 310 receives a response from the virtual machine 142 indicating that virtual machine 142 has successfully booted up, error monitor 310 may begin periodically monitoring virtual machine 142 for runtime errors. Otherwise, error monitor 310 can determine that virtual machine 142 has failed to successfully boot up and may transfer control to error remediator 320 to take one or more actions to attempt to successfully boot virtual machine 142,” Col 12, Lines 50-67 and Col 13, Lines 1-2. For the claimed “skippers,” the Examiner has mapped to Cao’s “support services.” After Du in view of Abbassi and Cao is combined with Bell, the status check response is provided from “support services” as a status-check service. The claimed “ rectification ” is addressed by the disclosed remediation. ). Du in view of Abbassi and Cao , and Bell are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of virtual machines and containers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi and Cao to incorporate the teachings of Bell and provide identifying an anomaly based on periodically receiving a status check response from the plurality of skippers; and providing the identified anomaly to the container management engine for rectification . Doing so would help provide allow efficient recovery in case of a system error ( Bell discloses, “Further, embodiments of the present disclosure provide techniques for automatically recovering from system errors in a virtual machine-based development environment,” Col 4, Lines 22-29.). Claim 13 and Claim 20 are a system claim and a computer-readable storage medium claim, respectively, corresponding to the method Claim 6. Therefore, Claim 13 and Claim 20 are rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 6. Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du (US 20170278421 A1) in view of Abbassi (US 20140278590 A1), Cao (US 20220019455 A1) , and Huang (US 20200228517 A1). Regarding Claim 7, Du in view of Abbassi and Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising generating asynchronous content based on a user profile associated with the user device and performance associated with the user device ( Du discloses “As part of the regular and instant grading feedback, the grading system may assign an easier or harder assignment depending on the user performances ,” ¶ 0069 .). Du in view of Abbassi and Cao does not teach that the asynchronous content is generated based on a user profile associated with the user device . However, Huang teaches generating based on a user profile associated with the user device ( Huang discloses, “Additionally/alternatively the identity information may be generated based on a user profile of a person using user device 527,” ¶ 0069 .) . Du in view of Abbassi and Cao , and Huang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of online computing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Du in view of Abbassi and Cao to incorporate the teachings of Huang and provide generating based on a user profile associated with the user device . Doing so would help tailor the system to the user’s preferences ( Huang discloses, “ The user profile may contain information such as contact information, address, user preferences etc. ,” ¶ 00 69 .). Claim 14 is a system claim corresponding to the method Claim 7. Therefore, Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason set forth in the rejection of Claim 7. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Corrie ( US 20170371693 A1 ): Managing Containers and Container Hosts in a Virtualized Computer System Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ANDREW SUN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6735 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 . 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, Aimee Li can be reached at (571) 272-4169 . 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. /A.N.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 2195 /Aimee Li/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2195