DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to communications filed March 10, 2026.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 10, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's argument filed March 10, 2026 regarding the rejection of claims 27-49 under 35 U.S.C 101, has been fully considered and is persuasive.
Applicants argue in substance:
Regarding claims 27-49, the applicants submit that the steps are being performed are directed to statutory subject matter with significantly more.
The argument of claims 27-49 have been fully considered and is persuasive.
Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claims 27-49 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed March 10, 2026 regarding the rejection of claims 27-49 under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Status of Claims
Claim 27-49 are pending, of which claims 27, 38, and 49 are in independent form. Claims 27-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 27-29, 34, 37-40, 45, and 48-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorenson, III (US 2019/0392047) (hereinafter Sorenson) in view of Sirton et al. (US 2018/0314706) (hereinafter Sirton), and in further view of Sharma et al. (US 2020/0250042) (hereinafter Sharma).
Regarding claim 27, Sorenson teaches a method implemented by a first storage node in a distributed database of healing compromised data items stored in the distributed database, the method comprising: locally storing, in a data storage, metadata for a plurality of data items stored in the distributed database (see Figs. 1-2, para [0024], discloses locally storing metadata for data items in a key-value distributed database service), the metadata including, for each data item, an identifier associated with the data item (see para [0015], discloses an item identifier and table identifier) and an associated replica location list indicating one or more storage nodes in the distributed database storing replicas of the data item (see Fig. 2, Figs. 4A-4B, para [0035], para [0040, 0047], para [0054], discloses table index structure (associated replica location list) indicating location of storage nodes via GUID, storing replicas of partition data items in the key-value database service).
Sorenson does not explicitly teach responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, iterating over the metadata in the data storage to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node; and performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sirton teaches responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, iterating over the metadata in the data storage to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node (see Fig. 1, Fig. 3, para [0011, 0017], para [0034], discloses rule triggers a risky task (fault) in a storage node, iterative scanning of object metadata in queues to identify risky task in list of tasks and storage node programed according to ILM, Information Lifecycle Management rule set).
Sorenson/Sirton are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson to iterate over metadata in data storage from disclosure of Sirton. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sirton as “effectively implement ILM policies and account for unreliability in a geographically distributed large-scale storage system (“storage system”), “scanners” and “ILM rules appliers” can be deployed on nodes throughout the storage system for large scale ILM implementation” (para [0010]) and iterating over metadata in a data storage is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Sorenson/Sirton do not explicitly teach performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sharma teaches performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node (see Fig. 4, Table 1, para [0088-0089], discloses cluster master re-queues files pending to appropriate node manager to restore job (performing healing procedure) managed by the cluster master).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton to perform a healing procedure from disclosure of Sharma. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sharma as “distributed streaming database system can efficiently scale to handle large numbers of cluster jobs in parallel without sacrificing performance” (para [0027]) and performing a healing procedure is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claim 38, Sorenson teaches a storage node in a distributed database configured to heal compromised data items stored in the distributed database, the storage node comprising: a metadata manager configured to locally store metadata in a local data storage for a plurality of data items stored in the distributed database (see Figs. 1-2, para [0024], discloses locally storing metadata for data items in a key-value distributed database service), the metadata including, for each data item, an identifier associated with the data item (see para [0015], discloses an item identifier and table identifier), and an associated replica location list indicating one or more storage nodes in the distributed database storing replicas of the data item (see Fig. 2, Figs. 4A-4B, para [0035], para [0040, 0047], para [0054], discloses table index structure (associated replica location list) indicating location of storage nodes via GUID, storing replicas of partition data items in the key-value database service).
Sorenson does not explicitly teach a healing manager configured to: iterate, responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, over the metadata in the local data storaqe to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node; and perform a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sirton teaches a healing manager configured to: iterate, responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, over the metadata in the local data storaqe to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node (see Fig. 1, Fig. 3, para [0011, 0017], para [0034], discloses rule triggers a risky task (fault) in a storage node, iterative scanning of object metadata in queues to identify risky task in list of tasks and storage node programed according to ILM, Information Lifecycle Management rule set).
Sorenson/Sirton are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson to iterate over metadata in data storage from disclosure of Sirton. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sirton as “effectively implement ILM policies and account for unreliability in a geographically distributed large-scale storage system (“storage system”), “scanners” and “ILM rules appliers” can be deployed on nodes throughout the storage system for large scale ILM implementation” (para [0010]) and iterating over metadata in a data storage is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Sorenson/Sirton do not explicitly teach performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sharma teaches performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node (see Fig. 4, Table 1, para [0088-0089], discloses cluster master re-queues files pending to appropriate node manager to restore job (performing healing procedure) managed by the cluster master).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton to perform a healing procedure from disclosure of Sharma. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sharma as “distributed streaming database system can efficiently scale to handle large numbers of cluster jobs in parallel without sacrificing performance” (para [0027]) and performing a healing procedure is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claim 49, Sorenson teaches a storage node in a distributed database configured to heal compromised data items stored in the distributed database, the storage node comprising: communication circuitry configured for communication with client devices and with other storage nodes in the distributed database (see Figs. 1-2, para [0024], discloses locally storing metadata for data items in a key-value distributed database service); data storage for storing replicas of data items (see Fig. 2, Figs. 4A-4B, para [0035], para [0040, 0047], para [0054], discloses table index structure indicating location of storage nodes via GUID, storing replicas of partition data items in the key-value database service); processing circuitry configured to: locally store, in the data storage, metadata for a plurality of data items stored in the distributed database (see Figs. 1-2, para [0024], discloses locally storing metadata for data items in a key-value distributed database service).
Sorenson does not explicitly teach the metadata including, for each data item, an identifier associated with the data item and an associated replica location list indicating one or more storage nodes in the distributed database storing replicas of the data item iterate, responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, over the metadata in the data storage to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node; and perform a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sirton teaches the metadata including, for each data item, an identifier associated with the data item and an associated replica location list indicating one or more storage nodes in the distributed database storing replicas of the data item iterate (see Fig. 1, Fig. 3, para [0017], discloses iterating over object metadata and list of risky tasks, object identifiers and location identifiers for respective objects), responsive to a trigger indicating a fault in a second storage node, over the metadata in the data storage to autonomously identify, based on the replica location list for each data item, compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node (see Fig. 1, Fig. 3, para [0011, 0017], para [0034], discloses rule triggers a risky task (fault) in a storage node, iterative scanning of object metadata in queues to identify risky task in list of tasks and storage node programed according to ILM, Information Lifecycle Management rule set).
Sorenson/Sirton are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson to iterate over metadata in data storage from disclosure of Sirton. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sirton as “effectively implement ILM policies and account for unreliability in a geographically distributed large-scale storage system (“storage system”), “scanners” and “ILM rules appliers” can be deployed on nodes throughout the storage system for large scale ILM implementation” (para [0010]) and iterating over metadata in a data storage is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Sorenson/Sirton do not explicitly teach perform a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node.
Sharma teaches perform a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node (see Fig. 4, Table 1, para [0088-0089], discloses cluster master re-queues files pending to appropriate node manager to restore job (performing healing procedure) managed by the cluster master).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton to perform a healing procedure from disclosure of Sharma. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Sharma as “distributed streaming database system can efficiently scale to handle large numbers of cluster jobs in parallel without sacrificing performance” (para [0027]) and performing a healing procedure is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claims 28 and 39, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a storage node of claim 38.
Sorenson does not explicitly teach wherein identifying compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node comprises: identifying one or more compromised data items having replicas stored in the second storage node; and for each compromised data item, determining whether the first storage node is designated as the healing node based on an order of the storage nodes in the associated replica location list.
Sharma teaches wherein identifying compromised data items for which the first storage node is designated as a healing node comprises: identifying one or more compromised data items having replicas stored in the second storage node (see Fig. 2, para [0075-0076], discloses identifying state information having replicated data at a second storage node in a node cluster); and for each compromised data item, determining whether the first storage node is designated as the healing node based on an order of the storage nodes in the associated replica location list (see para [0074], para [0083], discloses determining node with the highest tag or index as the cluster master in which a node cluster indexed is based on alphabet order sharding of data to each respective node of the node cluster).
Regarding claims 29 and 40, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a storage node of claim 38.
Sorenson does not explicitly teach wherein the first storage node is determined to be the designated healing node when the first storage node is first among the uncompromised storage nodes in the associated replica location list.
Sharma teaches wherein the first storage node is determined to be the designated healing node when the first storage node is first among the uncompromised storage nodes in the associated replica location list (see Fig. 4, Fig. 9, para [0086], para [0089], discloses cluster manager knows individual state of node managers and identifies cluster state data).
Regarding claims 34 and 45, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson does not explicitly teach further compromising synchronizing the locally stored metadata with replicated metadata locally stored by other storage nodes.
Sharma teaches compromising synchronizing the locally stored metadata with replicated metadata locally stored by other storage nodes (see Fig. 4, Fig. 7, para [0086, 088], discloses synchronizing file task data and Node Health to cluster master data).
Regarding claims 37 and 48, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson do not teach receiving a read request from a client device for a compromised data item; and responsive to the read request, providing the client device a copy of the compromised data item before the data item is healed.
Sharma teaches receiving a read request from a client device for a compromised data item (see Fig. 4, Table 1, para [0086], para [0088], discloses receiving request for failing to complete accepted file tasks and tracking health of a peer database instance); and responsive to the read request, providing the client device a copy of the compromised data item before the data item is healed (see Fig. 7, Table 1, para [0088], discloses providing Files Pending record state prior to restoring tasks).
Claims 30-33 and 41-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorenson, III (US 2019/0392047) (hereinafter Sorenson) in view of Sirton and Sharma et al. (US 2020/0250042) (hereinafter Sharma) as applied to claims 27 and 38 and in further view of Certain et al. (US 11,314,717) (hereinafter Certain).
Regarding claims 30 and 41, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson does not explicitly teach wherein performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node comprises: replicating the compromised data item to a third storage node selected by the first storage node; updating the associated replica location list to include the third storage node; and propagating the update to the replica location list for the compromised data item to other storage nodes in the distributed database.
Sharma teaches wherein performing a healing procedure for each compromised data item where the first storage node is designated as the healing node comprises: replicating the compromised data item to a third storage node selected by the first storage node (see Fig. 4, Table 1, para [0075-0076], para [0089-0090], discloses cluster master performing Node Health check-in when identifying a change in cluster state data (compromised data items) and replicating data to third storage node);
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma do not explicitly teach updating the associated replica location list to include the third storage node; and propagating the update to the replica location list for the compromised data item to other storage nodes in the distributed database.
Certain teaches updating the associated replica location list to include the third storage node (see Fig. 3, Fig. 10, col. 11 ln 55-64, col. 19 ln 41-46, disclose updating secondary index associated with an identifier for mapping failed propagation node to a third propagating node); and propagating the update to the replica location list for the compromised data item to other storage nodes in the distributed database (see Fig. 6, Figs. 12-13, col. 11 ln 60-65, col. 21 ln 57-65, discloses propagating updates to secondary index for failed propagation node to another propagation node).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Certain are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to propagate updates to a replica location list from disclosure of Certain. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Certain as “To maintain the replicated portions of the data set to be consistent with the data set, updates made to the data set may need to be replicated to the replicated portions of the data set” (col. 2 ln 51-54) propagating updates to a replica location list is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claims 31 and 42, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma does not explicitly teach determining, for each compromised data item, whether the first storage node is a master storage node for the compromised data item.
Certain teaches determining, for each compromised data item, whether the first storage node is a master storage node for the compromised data item (see Fig. 6, col. 10 ln 45-55, col. 16 ln 38-43, discloses determining which processing node (master node) has failed based on different arrangements of resources among processing nodes).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Certain are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to propagate updates to a replica location list from disclosure of Certain. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Certain as “To maintain the replicated portions of the data set to be consistent with the data set, updates made to the data set may need to be replicated to the replicated portions of the data set” (col. 2 ln 51-54) propagating updates to a replica location list is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claims 32 and 43, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma does not explicitly teach wherein the first storage node determines that it is the master node for a compromised data item when the first storage node is first in the associated replica location list.
Certain teaches wherein the first storage node determines that it is the master node for a compromised data item when the first storage node is first in the associated replica location list (see Fig. 6, col. 16 ln 38-43, discloses if a master node fails a new processing node (new master node) assumes responsibility for secondary index).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Certain are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to propagate updates to a replica location list from disclosure of Certain. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Certain as “To maintain the replicated portions of the data set to be consistent with the data set, updates made to the data set may need to be replicated to the replicated portions of the data set” (col. 2 ln 51-54) propagating updates to a replica location list is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claims 33 and 44, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma does not explicitly teach when the first storage node is not the master storage node for the data item: self-promoting the first storage node to a status of new master node for the compromised data item; updating the associated replica location list to indicate the updated status of the first storage node; and propagating the update to the replica location list to other storage nodes in the distributed database.
Certain teaches when the first storage node is not the master storage node for the data item: self-promoting the first storage node to a status of new master node for the compromised data item (see Fig. 6, col. 16 ln 43-51, discloses a new processing node (new master node) assuming responsibility for secondary index when a different processing node did not complete deleting items with tombstone markers and older version identifiers); updating the associated replica location list to indicate the updated status of the first storage node (see Figs. 5-6, col. 15 ln 32-42, discloses updating the secondary index with committed version identifiers in propagation state data); and propagating the update to the replica location list to other storage nodes in the distributed database (see Figs. 5-6, col. 15 ln 32-40, discloses updating propagation state that completed successfully across all secondary indexes).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Certain are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to propagate updates to a replica location list from disclosure of Certain. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Certain as “To maintain the replicated portions of the data set to be consistent with the data set, updates made to the data set may need to be replicated to the replicated portions of the data set” (col. 2 ln 51-54) propagating updates to a replica location list is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Claims 35-36 and 46-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorenson, III (US 2019/0392047) (hereinafter Sorenson) in view of Sirton and Sharma et al. (US 2020/0250042) (hereinafter Sharma) as applied to claims 27 and 38 and in further view of Karl et al. (US 2021/0089540) (hereinafter Karl).
Regarding claims 35 and 46, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma do not teach receiving a location request from a client device for a data item; and responsive to the location request, sending the replica location associated with the data item to the client device.
Karl teaches receiving a location request from a client device for a data item (see Fig. 8, para [0098], discloses receiving a request to update table location (location request)); and responsive to the location request, sending the replica location associated with the data item to the client device (see Fig. 9A, Fig. 10, para [0102-0103], para [0118], discloses sending replica tables associated with updating table location).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Karl are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to receive a location request from disclosure of Karl. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Karl as “query performance for all schemas 714 can be improved if a single schema requests that the replica table 738 be used” (para [0091]) receiving a location request is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Regarding claims 36 and 47, Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma teach a method of claim 1 and a node of claim 38.
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma do not teach receiving a write request from a client device for a new data item; replicating, responsive to the write request, the new data item to one or more storage nodes in the distributed database; updating the locally stored metadata to include an identifier for the new data item and an associated replica location list; and propagating the update to the locally stored metadata to other storage nodes in the distributed database.
Karl teaches receiving a write request from a client device for a new data item (see para [0041], discloses receiving a write request from user for a replica table for a virtual table (new data item)); replicating, responsive to the write request, the new data item to one or more storage nodes in the distributed database (see Fig. 1, para [0042], para [0053-0054], discloses replicating virtual table to replica tables in datastore); updating the locally stored metadata to include an identifier for the new data item and an associated replica location list (see Fig. 4, Fig. 7, para [0088-0089], discloses updating table pointer (identifier) to point to replica table) ; and propagating the update to the locally stored metadata to other storage nodes in the distributed database (see Fig. 4, para [0041], para [0062], discloses table pointer updated to reference a table in cache 204).
Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma/Karl are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems.
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sorenson/Sirton/Sharma to receive a location request from disclosure of Karl. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Karl as “query performance for all schemas 714 can be improved if a single schema requests that the replica table 738 be used” (para [0091]) receiving a location request is known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY HARMON whose telephone number is (571)270-5861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Ann Lo can be reached at 571-272-9767. 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.
/Courtney Harmon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159