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 .
Claims 1-7, 10-16, 18-19, and 21-24 are pending. Claims 1-2, 10-11, and 18-19 have been amended and claims 8-9, 17, and 20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-24 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/23/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant’s representative asserts arguments to address the rejections under 35 USC 101 and 35 USC 103.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 101, the Applicant’s representative asserts that the claims are not directed to a grouping of abstract ideas but i) are directed to non-abstract improvements to computer technology and ii) necessarily rooted in computer technology (see Remarks, pg. 8-10). Specifically, the Applicant’s representative asserts that the amended claims which recite “obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks game states of the game application and the game states include respective statues of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device”, “in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application since a previous save; and saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the XR environment without saving the presentation information;” recites an improvement in computer gaming functionality. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Each of the submitted amendments steps directed to result-oriented functional language that provides a desired result and does not provide the detail of how the inventor achieved the claimed solution. Moreover, the claim recites performing the series of steps and/or instructions of the save affordance by invoking highly-generalized computer components as a tool that manage the game application which amounts to mere instructions to invoke a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f), performing insignificant extra solution activity (e.g., obtaining a gaming application….at the electronic device) (see MPEP 2106.05(g)); and/or providing a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea. In particular, the claim amendments do not provide as to how the inventor achieved a technical solution to a technical problem but merely a desired result which is not indicative of an improvement to computer functionality. For at least these reasons, the claims are not found to be directed to non-abstract improvements to computer technology and/or necessarily rooted in computer technology that integrate the claim into a practical application under Step 2A-prong 2. For at least these reasons, the rejection under 35 USC 101 has been maintained.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 103, the Applicant’s representative asserts that the claimed combination of Moriwaki and Butcher do not disclose or suggest all of the elements recited in Claim 1. Specifically, the Applicant’s representative asserts that the prior art fails to disclose “game states” that “include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for render the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device” (see Remarks, pg. 10-12). Further, the Applicant’s representative asserts that the prior art combination does not disclose “respective statuses of the one or more entities” from “presentation information for rendering the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment” and “in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application since a previous save; and saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the XR environment without saving the presentation information.” Although, the Examiner notes that the combination of Moriwaki and Butcher teaches many of the newly amended elements of the limitations it is silent with respect to the gaming application in the technological environment of an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device. For at least this reason, does not appear to recite all elements of the claimed invention. However, after further consideration and search, a new combination has been asserted in the rejection 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 1-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more. The claims, as exemplified by independent claim 1, recites limitations directed to a grouping of abstract ideas such as:
1. A method comprising:
at an electronic device including one or more processors, a display, and a non-transitory memory:
obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks states of the game application and the game states include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device;
displaying, on the display, one or more virtual objects representing the one or more entities in the XR environment;
while executing the gaming application in the XR environment, overlaying on the gaming application a save affordance; and
in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application, during execution of the gaming application since a previous save; -certain method of organizing human activity; and
saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the XR environment without saving the presentation information. – certain method of organizing human activity
The claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1, recite limitations that are found to be directed to a certain method of organizing human activity because they recite steps for managing a game including rules and/or instructions to detect a user input to save progress of the gaming application. For at least these reasons, the claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1 are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas under Step 2A-prong 1.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations such as: “at a device including one or more processors, a display, and a non-transitory memory:” “obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks states of the game application and the game states include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device;” “displaying, on the display, one or more virtual objects representing the one or more entities in the XR environment;” “while executing the gaming application in the XR environment, overlaying on the gaming application a save affordance;” and “in the non-transitory memory,” that are found to recite mere instructions to invoke a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea, insignificant extra solution activity, and/or provide a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)-(h)). For at least these reasons, the additional elements are not found to integrate the claim into a practical application under Step 2A-prong 2.
The claims, as exemplified by independent Claim 1, do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements such as: “an electronic device”, “one or more processors”, “a display”, “a non-transitory memory” and “a game system” that when viewed individually and/or as a collection of elements recite highly-generalized computer components of a computer and/or that amount a commercially available technological environment to be invoked as a tool to implement the abstract idea, perform insignificant extra solution activity, and/or provide a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)-(h)). It follows that the additional elements directed to highly-generalized computer components are analogous to Alice v. CLS in which the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Furthermore, a review of the Specification indicates that an electronic device, processor, memory, display, and/or game system are referred to in a generic manner which indicates that they are commercially available computer components widely used and known to one of ordinary skill in the gaming arts. For at least these reasons, the additional elements are not found to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea under Step 2B.
Independent Claim 10 and 18 are found to recite substantially the same limitations as independent Claim 1 in which the analysis of the subject matter is incorporated herein. The differences of independent Claim 10 and 18 are that they are directed to “the electronic device” and “the non-transitory computer readable storage medium” embodiments of the claims subject matter which does not substantially alter the analysis and findings under the two-part Alice test. For at least these reasons, independent Claims 10 and 18 are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more.
Regarding dependent claims 2-9, 11-17, 19, and 21-24, the limitations have been reviewed and analyzed and were found to recite additional steps and/or instructions directed to a grouping of abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)), invoke a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea, insignificant extra solution activity, and/or provide a technological environment in which to perform the abstract idea. (see MPEP 2106.05(f)-(h)). For at least these reasons, claims 1-20 are found to recite a grouping of abstract ideas without significantly more.
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.
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 1-2, 10-11, 18-19, 21-22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander (US 2016/0184712 A1), hereinafter ‘Colenbrander ‘712’, in combination with Colenbrander (US 2018/0288133 A1), hereinafter ‘Colenbrander ‘133’ and Butcher et al. (WO 98/04327).
Regarding claim 1, Colenbrander ‘712 discloses a method comprising: at an electronic device including one or more processors, a display, and a non-transitory memory (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0032, 0034):
obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks states of the game application and the game states include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0011, 0022, 0030, 0092, 0096-0098, wherein the system receives changes the state of or a point of view within a video game and client provides rendering of the game application);
displaying, on the display, one or more virtual objects representing the one or more entities while executing the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0061, 0099, wherein the server provides a multiplayer game that sends game state information to multiple clients); and
in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0024-0026, 0038, 0092, wherein the detected output is a game command that changes the state of or point of view within a video game, and provide an updated video stream reflecting this change), during execution of the gaming application since a previous save (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0041-0042, 0044-0046, wherein the save point selected reflects a state since a previous save (e.g., saved for historical purposes) during the progress of the game); and
saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the environment without saving the presentation information (see Colenbrander ‘712, Fig. 2A-2C, 3, 0041-0046; 0057-0058, wherein the reconstructing the save point does not save the metadata to recreate the game from the save point). However, Colenbrander ‘712 is silent with respect to the gaming application provided in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device and overlaying on the gaming application a save affordance.
Colenbrander ‘133 teaches a gaming system for gaming applications that for saving a state in an extended reality (XR) environment (see Colenbrander ‘133, 0039, 0083-0085, 0087). One would have been motivated to implement a save state in an extended reality (XR) environment to yield the predictable result to restore a state of a game for play at a later time. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application at the electronic device to render the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device; represent one or more entities in the XR environment; and save the progress of the gaming application in the XR environment. However, Colenbrander ‘712 and ‘133 are silent with respect to overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Butcher teaches a device while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance (see Butcher, Figs. 6, 14,pg. 10: ln 25-30, pg. 13: ln 5-13, pg. 14: ln 5-10, wherein the user interface includes a save affordance (“Save/Play” button 732 on the IWRG window)). One would have been motivated use known techniques to display an overlay on a user interface of a save affordance on the IWRG to yield the predictable result to allow the user to save a sequence of actions in a file for future reference (see Butcher, pg. 10: ln 28-29). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Regarding claim 10, Colenbrander ‘712 discloses an electronic gaming device comprising: one or more processors, a non-transitory memory; and a display (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0032, 0034); and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the non-transitory memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for (see Colenbrander ‘712 –0030, wherein the games database 132 stores multiple games and other applications):
obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks states of the game application and the game states include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0011, 0022, 0030, 0092, 0096-0098, wherein the system receives changes the state of or a point of view within a video game and client provides rendering of the game application);
displaying, on the display, one or more virtual objects representing the one or more entities while executing the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0061, 0099, wherein the server provides a multiplayer game that sends game state information to multiple clients); and
in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0024-0026, 0038, 0092, wherein the detected output is a game command that changes the state of or point of view within a video game, and provide an updated video stream reflecting this change), during execution of the gaming application since a previous save (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0041-0042, 0044-0046, wherein the save point selected reflects a state since a previous save (e.g., saved for historical purposes) during the progress of the game); and
saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the environment without saving the presentation information (see Colenbrander ‘712, Fig. 2A-2C, 3, 0041-0046; 0057-0058, wherein the reconstructing the save point does not save the metadata to recreate the game from the save point). However, Colenbrander ‘712 is silent with respect to the gaming application provided in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device and overlaying on the gaming application a save affordance.
Colenbrander ‘133 teaches a gaming system for gaming applications that for saving a state in an extended reality (XR) environment (see Colenbrander ‘133, 0039, 0083-0085, 0087). One would have been motivated to implement a save state in an extended reality (XR) environment to yield the predictable result to restore a state of a game for play at a later time. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application at the electronic device to render the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device; represent one or more entities in the XR environment; and save the progress of the gaming application in the XR environment. However, Colenbrander ‘712 and ‘133 are silent with respect to overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Butcher teaches a device while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance (see Butcher, Figs. 6, 14,pg. 10: ln 25-30, pg. 13: ln 5-13, pg. 14: ln 5-10, wherein the user interface includes a save affordance (“Save/Play” button 732 on the IWRG window)). One would have been motivated use known techniques to display an overlay on a user interface of a save affordance on the IWRG to yield the predictable result to allow the user to save a sequence of actions in a file for future reference (see Butcher, pg. 10: ln 28-29). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Regarding claim 18, Colenbrander ‘712 discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, that, when executed by an electronic device with one or more processors, and a display, cause the electronic device to (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0030, 0032, 0034):
obtaining a gaming application including one or more entities from a game system, wherein the game system tracks states of the game application and the game states include respective statuses of the one or more entities and presentation information for rendering the game application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0011, 0022, 0030, 0092, 0096-0098, wherein the system receives changes the state of or a point of view within a video game and client provides rendering of the game application);
displaying, on the display, one or more virtual objects representing the one or more entities while executing the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0061, 0099, wherein the server provides a multiplayer game that sends game state information to multiple clients); and
in response to detecting a user input directed to the save affordance: determining changed statuses of the one or more entities during execution of the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0024-0026, 0038, 0092, wherein the detected output is a game command that changes the state of or point of view within a video game, and provide an updated video stream reflecting this change), during execution of the gaming application since a previous save (see Colenbrander ‘712, 0041-0042, 0044-0046, wherein the save point selected reflects a state since a previous save (e.g., saved for historical purposes) during the progress of the game); and
saving, in the non-transitory memory, the changed statuses of the one or more entities as a representation of progress of the gaming application in the environment without saving the presentation information (see Colenbrander ‘712, Fig. 2A-2C, 3, 0041-0046; 0057-0058, wherein the reconstructing the save point does not save the metadata to recreate the game from the save point). However, Colenbrander ‘712 is silent with respect to the gaming application provided in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device and overlaying on the gaming application a save affordance.
Colenbrander ‘133 teaches a gaming system for gaming applications that for saving a state in an extended reality (XR) environment (see Colenbrander ‘133, 0039, 0083-0085, 0087). One would have been motivated to implement a save state in an extended reality (XR) environment to yield the predictable result to restore a state of a game for play at a later time. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application at the electronic device to render the game application in an extended reality (XR) environment at the electronic device; represent one or more entities in the XR environment; and save the progress of the gaming application in the XR environment. However, Colenbrander ‘712 and ‘133 are silent with respect to overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Butcher teaches a device while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance (see Butcher, Figs. 6, 14,pg. 10: ln 25-30, pg. 13: ln 5-13, pg. 14: ln 5-10, wherein the user interface includes a save affordance (“Save/Play” button 732 on the IWRG window)). One would have been motivated use known techniques to display an overlay on a user interface of a save affordance on the IWRG to yield the predictable result to allow the user to save a sequence of actions in a file for future reference (see Butcher, pg. 10: ln 28-29). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application while executing the gaming application, overlaying on the gaming application a user interface that includes a save affordance.
Regarding claim 2 and 11, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. The combination further teach wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a position of the entity in an XR environment associated with the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712 – 0101, 0105; ‘133 – 0079, 0084).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 18. The combination further teach wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises at least one of the following: a position of the entity in an environment associated with the gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712 – 0101, 0105; ‘133 – 0079, 0084); a type of the entity; an action that is performable by the entity; a resource counter; and a turn indicator.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 18, wherein the game system resides on a server, separate from the electronic device, and the gaming application is a multiplayer gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712, Fig. 1, 0027, 0099).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher, wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the electronic device, further cause the electronic device to: in a mirroring phase, create the one or more virtual objects in the XR environment the electronic device; and mirror the respective statuses of the one or more entities every frame in the multiplayer gaming application (see Colenbrander ‘712 – 0067-0068, wherein the captured state can be re-create an identical application state data on the same or a different computer system; 0099; Colenbrander ‘133 – 0039, 0085, 0087).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 18, wherein obtaining the gaming application includes obtaining rendering information of the game application regarding the presentation information in the XR environment (see Colenbrander ‘712-0096, 00101-0102, , Colenbrander ‘133 – 0045, 0083-0084).
Claims 3-5, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133, and Butcher as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Morikawa (US 6,749,514 B1).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. However, the combination is silent wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a position of the entity on a game board, and wherein the position of the entity is associated with a position identifier.
Moriwaki teaches a method and electronic device wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a position of the entity on a game board, and wherein the position of the entity is associated with a position identifier (see Moriwaki, col. 2: ln 21-24, col. 7: ln 9-27, wherein the position of an object in the virtual environment on the geographical map (e.g., game board) such as the X, Y, Z, coordinates associated with the object is saved and determined). One would have been motivated to incorporate saving techniques to yield the predictable result for saving a game state in an electronic game application. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a position of the entity on a game board, and wherein the position of the entity is associated with a position identifier.
Regarding claims 4 and 13, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. However, the combination is silent to wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a type of the entity.
Moriwaki teaches a method and electronic device wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a type of the entity (see Moriwaki, col. 11: ln 1-52, wherein the type of the entity is stored in the form of different face expressions, characters, and items which indicates the saved status comprises a type of the entity). One would have been motivated to incorporate saving techniques to yield the predictable result for saving a game state in an electronic game application. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises associated with the gaming application comprises a type of the entity.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. However, the combination is silent to wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises an action that is performable by the entity.
Moriwaki teaches wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises an action that is performable by the entity (see Moriwaki, col. 7: ln 35-59, wherein the movement information of the object is saved including the positional data, rotational angle, action information of the object or the trajectory which is an action that is performable by the entity). One would have been motivated to incorporate saving techniques to yield the predictable result for saving a game state in an electronic game application. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises an action that is performable by the entity.
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133, and Butcher as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Benedetto et al. (US 2017/0354884 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133, and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. However, the combination is silent with respect to wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a resource counter.
Benedetto teach wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a resource counter (see Benedetto, 0075, wherein the status of the entity in the gaming application comprises time counters, number of lives left, character attributes, total possible number of lives available). One would have been motivated to substitute the game applications of Colenbrander with the role playing game application of Benedetto to track the different game attributes of a character’s progress. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application wherein the gaming application comprises a resource counter.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, the combination of Colenbrander ‘712, Colenbrander ‘133 and Butcher teach the method of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. However, the combination is silent with respect to wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a turn indicator.
Benedetto teach wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a turn indicator (see Benedetto, 0333, wherein the game state saved is maintained based on game rules such as move, turn). One would have been motivated to substitute the gaming application of Colenbrander with the role playing game application of Benedetto to comprise a to track the different game attributes of a character’s progress. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the application wherein a status of an entity associated with the gaming application comprises a turn indicator.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 RYAN HSU whose telephone number is (571)272-7148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00-6:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RYAN HSU/ EXAMINER, Art Unit 3715