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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bahl et al. (U.S. Pub No. 2005/0239497 A1).
1, Bahl creates a communication device comprising: a plurality of wireless communication interfaces corresponding to a plurality of wireless communication technologies, respectively; at least one memory storing instructions [par 0005, 0034,
For example, a computing device supports multiple wireless interfaces, incorporating different wireless technologies, that use overlapping wireless signal frequency bands.
Components of computer 110 may include, but are not limited to, a processing unit 120, a system memory 130, and a system bus 121 that couples various system components including the system memory to the processing unit 120. The system bus 121 may be any of several types of bus structures including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, and a local bus using any of a variety of bus architectures],
and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to; acquire information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to each of a
plurality of wireless communication interfaces provided in a communication device, abstract the information indicating a wireless communication characteristics related to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces [par 0013, One or more of the factors within the set of factors are incorporated into specified wireless technology selection criteria. A computing device incorporating the present invention acquires information regarding the status and/or capabilities associated with each available wireless technology supported by network interfaces on the computing device. Thereafter, the computing device renders factor values for ones of the set of factors based upon the set of information acquired for each available wireless technology. After calculating factor values, the computing device renders a wireless technology selection based at least in part upon applying the calculated factor values to the wireless technology selection criteria. The present invention thus facilitates implementing dynamic network interface/network selection on a computing device in response to a variety of sensed conditions that affect the values assigned to factors incorporated into specified wireless selection criteria]
and present the information to a user[par 0116, 0147, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. Having described an example criterion for wireless network technology selection based upon a set of factors, a number of observations are provided herein below that build upon the example. An advanced wireless user interface option on a STA allows a user to specify weights/preference order for the above described factors with the ability to specify one or more of the factors as overriding criteria/factors--and one factor as critical. If two or more factors are marked as overriding, then their weights must differ. The user indicates, through another option, whether the STA should prompt the user for confirmation if the acceptable limits for a critical factor are not met. The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks]
acquire information set by the user with respect to the presented information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to each of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces of the communication device [par 0116, 0118, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. In a simple criterion wherein only the speed 904 is considered, then if a selection is made between 802.11a and b technologies, then 802.11a is selected over 802.11b--even if an excessive number of current 802.11a users results in greater individual throughput via the 802.11b technology],
the information set by the user including, for each of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces, information related to a purposes of use of the communication device [par 0101, In a first example of dynamically configuring a criterion, a criterion selection rule/algorithm determines which criterion, of a set of wireless selection criteria, will be used to select an interface/network to which a wireless connection will be established/maintained. Thus, by way of example, a first criterion is used when a computing device is operating with a substantially high level of stored battery energy, a second criterion is used when a battery's stored energy is low],
a communication requirement of an application [par 0103, 0121, Thus, by way of example, a set of factor weights are specified for a particular application. When the application is launched, the factor weights are loaded into a criterion shell. Thereafter, factor values are applied to a resulting application-specific criterion to render an interface/network selection. In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, a weight (WCW) is given to the throughput 910 parameter based on the requirements of particular applications running on the STA. For example, if Audio/Video streaming applications are running, a higher weight than normal should be used],
use environment [fig 9, par 0147, The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks. For example, the cost per bit 920 factor value is assigned a weight of 0 for the work environment, but a higher weight is assigned for a public access point]
a relationship with another system [fig 9, par 0124, Connectivity (CON) 916: specifies a measure of connectedness to resources via a wireless interface. If a STA is aware, from earlier saved experience, of the kind of connectivity provided by certain 802.11a and 802.11b networks at a particular location, it can select (or apply a high factor value to) a network that provides better connectivity. In the absence of any indications to the contrary, two Wi-Fi technologies such as 802.11a and 802.11b advertising the same SSID offer similar connectivity],
and an operation[fig 9, par 0127, Application throughput requirements APPTHRPT 922: specifies a throughput needed by one or more particular active applications on a computing device to ensure proper operation of the applications on the device (STA) that will utilize the selected wireless technology. The STA determines the throughput requirements of the applications running on it based on quality of service attributes set by the applications. By way of example, in an energy conservation mode of operation],
and create a selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from among the plurality of wireless communication technologies [par 0101, 0105, The selection framework derives factor values from acquired information elements (e.g., network status/capabilities) relating to multiple combinations of interface/network combinations available to a computing device. The factor values derived for each of the available combinations are then applied to an interface/network selection criterion. The criterion, by way of example, comprises a logical/arithmetic combination of weighted factor values. Applying the derived factor values for each interface/network option to the selection criterion renders a resulting interface/network selection for wireless network communications. In an exemplary embodiment, factor values are applied to an interface/network selection criterion to select between two Wi-Fi technologies, 802.11a and 802.11b. The set of parameters potentially used by a wireless technology/network selection criterion includes information elements associated with a wireless network interface card through which a connection is potentially established with a network. An SSap 816 specifies a signal strength seen by the access point. An SSsta 818 specifies a signal strength seen by the network interface card. A Perrpsta 820 specifies a percentage of packet errors in packets received by the network interface card. A TPsta 822 specifies a transmission power used by the network interface card];
grasp communication qualities according to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces [fig 9, par 0115-0128, Having described a set of parameters and terms utilized to define wireless technology selection criteria according to a wireless technology selection framework described herein, representative factors and overall quality score (enumerated in Fig 9)]; and
a selection unit configured to select a wireless communication interface corresponding to a wireless communication technology to be prioritized among the plurality of wireless communication technologies on the basis of the selection rule and the communication qualities [fig 11, par 0133, 0138, The information elements and selection criteria are acquired from a variety of sources. Turning to FIG. 10, a set of information element sources are identified. To determine values of some of the identified factors utilized by the wireless technology criteria, This list of sources of information and criteria that drive the selection process provided above is intended to be illustrative. Also, the present invention contemplates using global information such as priorities of data sets as set, for example, by an administrator through a management tool and/or by applications].
Claim 3, Bahl demonstrates the communication device according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor configured to execute the instructions describe or correct the characteristics and the selection rule on the basis of a user input [par 0132, 0142, 0147, system incorporating the above-described selection framework can also employ dynamic learning in that the system keeps a history of user selections for ambiguous situations that are subsequently resolved through user input, and, if allowed by the policy, chooses to use this history of past user selections to resolve similar ambiguous situations in the future. An advanced wireless user interface option on a STA allows a user to specify weights/preference order for the above described factors with the ability to specify one or more of the factors as overriding criteria/factors--and one factor as critical. If two or more factors are marked as overriding, then their weights must differ. The user indicates, through another option, whether the STA should prompt the user for confirmation if the acceptable limits for a critical factor are not met. The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies].
Claim 4, Bahl illustrate the communication device according claim 1, wherein the plurality of wireless communication technologies include identical wireless communication technologies or different wireless communication technologies[par 0144-0148, the following pseudo-code specifies an exemplary criterion for selecting between 802.11b 802.11a wireless technologies. This example demonstrates how to use the above-described information elements and factors to implement wireless technology/network selection criteria. Switching between technologies is transparent to a user. Therefore, if 802.11b is selected as the preferred connectivity technology based on a value for the QN 924, and it is later determined, as indicated by a change in the value of the QN 924, that 802.11a should be used (or vice versa), the computing device seamlessly transitions to the selected technology. Regardless of whether or not the two wireless technologies provide connectivity to the same subnet].
Claim 6, Bahl discloses the communication device according to claim 1, further comprising: a wired communication interface configured to perform wired LAN communication with a device outside the communication device [par 0040, When used in a LAN networking environment, the computer 110 is connected to the LAN 171 through one or more wired/wireless network interfaces 170. Furthermore, the set of one or more wired/wireless network interfaces 170 support communications over the WAN 173, such as the Internet];
and wherein the at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to; switch a route to connect the one wireless communication interface selected and the wired communication interface [par 0010, The computing device becomes aware of a particular connection failing. If the connection fails, the user is prompted to try re-connecting, or the user potentially selects an alternative network communication media (e.g., a wired connection to a network), or the computing device does this automatically if so prescribed by policy].
Claim 9, Bahl disclose a communication method comprising: acquiring information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to each of a plurality of wireless communication interfaces provided in a communication device, abstracting the information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces[par 0013, One or more of the factors within the set of factors are incorporated into specified wireless technology selection criteria. A computing device incorporating the present invention acquires information regarding the status and/or capabilities associated with each available wireless technology supported by network interfaces on the computing device. Thereafter, the computing device renders factor values for ones of the set of factors based upon the set of information acquired for each available wireless technology. After calculating factor values, the computing device renders a wireless technology selection based at least in part upon applying the calculated factor values to the wireless technology selection criteria. The present invention thus facilitates implementing dynamic network interface/network selection on a computing device in response to a variety of sensed conditions that affect the values assigned to factors incorporated into specified wireless selection criteria]
and presenting the abstracted information to a user [par 0116, 0147, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. Having described an example criterion for wireless network technology selection based upon a set of factors, a number of observations are provided herein below that build upon the example. An advanced wireless user interface option on a STA allows a user to specify weights/preference order for the above described factors with the ability to specify one or more of the factors as overriding criteria/factors--and one factor as critical. If two or more factors are marked as overriding, then their weights must differ. The user indicates, through another option, whether the STA should prompt the user for confirmation if the acceptable limits for a critical factor are not met. The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks]
acquiring information set by the user with respect to the presented information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to each of the plurality of wireless communications interfaces of the communication device[par 0116, 0118, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. In a simple criterion wherein only the speed 904 is considered, then if a selection is made between 802.11a and b technologies, then 802.11a is selected over 802.11b--even if an excessive number of current 802.11a users results in greater individual throughput via the 802.11b technology],
the information set by the user including, for each of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces, information related to a purposes of use of the communication device[par 0101, In a first example of dynamically configuring a criterion, a criterion selection rule/algorithm determines which criterion, of a set of wireless selection criteria, will be used to select an interface/network to which a wireless connection will be established/maintained. Thus, by way of example, a first criterion is used when a computing device is operating with a substantially high level of stored battery energy, a second criterion is used when a battery's stored energy is low],
a communication requirement of an application[par 0103, 0121, Thus, by way of example, a set of factor weights are specified for a particular application. When the application is launched, the factor weights are loaded into a criterion shell. Thereafter, factor values are applied to a resulting application-specific criterion to render an interface/network selection. In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, a weight (WCW) is given to the throughput 910 parameter based on the requirements of particular applications running on the STA. For example, if Audio/Video streaming applications are running, a higher weight than normal should be used],
a use environment[fig 9, par 0147, The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks. For example, the cost per bit 920 factor value is assigned a weight of 0 for the work environment, but a higher weight is assigned for a public access point],
a relationship with another system[fig 9, par 0124, Connectivity (CON) 916: specifies a measure of connectedness to resources via a wireless interface. If a STA is aware, from earlier saved experience, of the kind of connectivity provided by certain 802.11a and 802.11b networks at a particular location, it can select (or apply a high factor value to) a network that provides better connectivity. In the absence of any indications to the contrary, two Wi-Fi technologies such as 802.11a and 802.11b advertising the same SSID offer similar connectivity],
and an operations[fig 9, par 0127, Application throughput requirements APPTHRPT 922: specifies a throughput needed by one or more particular active applications on a computing device to ensure proper operation of the applications on the device (STA) that will utilize the selected wireless technology. The STA determines the throughput requirements of the applications running on it based on quality of service attributes set by the applications. By way of example, in an energy conservation mode of operation],
and create a selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from among the plurality of wireless communication technologies corresponding to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces based on the information indicating wireless communication characteristics, the information set by the user, and an input by the user [par 0101, 0105, 0131, 0132, The selection framework derives factor values from acquired information elements (e.g., network status/capabilities) relating to multiple combinations of interface/network combinations available to a computing device. The factor values derived for each of the available combinations are then applied to an interface/network selection criterion. The criterion, by way of example, comprises a logical/arithmetic combination of weighted factor values. Applying the derived factor values for each interface/network option to the selection criterion renders a resulting interface/network selection for wireless network communications. In an exemplary embodiment, factor values are applied to an interface/network selection criterion to select between two Wi-Fi technologies, 802.11a and 802.11b. Furthermore, policy specifications are sufficiently rich to state, in cases where the minimum or maximum acceptable value for an overriding factor is not met by any interface, then the STA alerts a user, prompts the user, and accepts a manual selection in view of the unacceptable current status. The system keeps a history of user selections for ambiguous situations that are subsequently resolved through user input, and, if allowed by the policy, chooses to use this history of past user selections to resolve similar ambiguous situations in the future];
grasping communication qualities according to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces[fig 9, par 0115-0128, Having described a set of parameters and terms utilized to define wireless technology selection criteria according to a wireless technology selection framework described herein, representative factors and overall quality score (enumerated in Fig 9)];
and selecting a wireless communication interface corresponding to a wireless communication technology to be prioritized among the plurality of wireless communication technologies on the basis of the selection rule and the communication qualities[fig 11, par 0133, 0138, The information elements and selection criteria are acquired from a variety of sources. Turning to FIG. 10, a set of information element sources are identified. To determine values of some of the identified factors utilized by the wireless technology criteria, This list of sources of information and criteria that drive the selection process provided above is intended to be illustrative. Also, the present invention contemplates using global information such as priorities of data sets as set, for example, by an administrator through a management tool and/or by applications].
Claim 10, Bahl conveys a non-transitory computer-readable medium configured to store a program[par 0005, 0034, For example, a computing device supports multiple wireless interfaces, incorporating different wireless technologies, that use overlapping wireless signal frequency bands.
Components of computer 110 may include, but are not limited to, a processing unit 120, a system memory 130, and a system bus 121 that couples various system components including the system memory to the processing unit 120. The system bus 121 may be any of several types of bus structures including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, and a local bus using any of a variety of bus architectures],
acquiring information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to a each of a plurality of wireless communication interfaces provided in a communication device, abstracting the information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces[par 0013, One or more of the factors within the set of factors are incorporated into specified wireless technology selection criteria. A computing device incorporating the present invention acquires information regarding the status and/or capabilities associated with each available wireless technology supported by network interfaces on the computing device. Thereafter, the computing device renders factor values for ones of the set of factors based upon the set of information acquired for each available wireless technology. After calculating factor values, the computing device renders a wireless technology selection based at least in part upon applying the calculated factor values to the wireless technology selection criteria. The present invention thus facilitates implementing dynamic network interface/network selection on a computing device in response to a variety of sensed conditions that affect the values assigned to factors incorporated into specified wireless selection criteria],
and presenting the abstracted information to a user par 0116, 0147, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. Having described an example criterion for wireless network technology selection based upon a set of factors, a number of observations are provided herein below that build upon the example. An advanced wireless user interface option on a STA allows a user to specify weights/preference order for the above described factors with the ability to specify one or more of the factors as overriding criteria/factors--and one factor as critical. If two or more factors are marked as overriding, then their weights must differ. The user indicates, through another option, whether the STA should prompt the user for confirmation if the acceptable limits for a critical factor are not met. The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks]
acquire information set by the user with respect to the presented information indicating wireless communication characteristics related to each of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces of the communication device [par 0116, 0118, a user/client to decide between technologies/interfaces/networks. A criterion within the set of criteria specify one or more factors and associated weights for making a selection. In a simple criterion wherein only the speed 904 is considered, then if a selection is made between 802.11a and b technologies, then 802.11a is selected over 802.11b--even if an excessive number of current 802.11a users results in greater individual throughput via the 802.11b technology],
the information set by the user including, for each of the plurality of wireless communication interfaces, information related to a purposes of use of the communication device [par 0101, In a first example of dynamically configuring a criterion, a criterion selection rule/algorithm determines which criterion, of a set of wireless selection criteria, will be used to select an interface/network to which a wireless connection will be established/maintained. Thus, by way of example, a first criterion is used when a computing device is operating with a substantially high level of stored battery energy, a second criterion is used when a battery's stored energy is low],
a communication requirement of an application [par 0103, 0121, Thus, by way of example, a set of factor weights are specified for a particular application. When the application is launched, the factor weights are loaded into a criterion shell. Thereafter, factor values are applied to a resulting application-specific criterion to render an interface/network selection. In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, a weight (WCW) is given to the throughput 910 parameter based on the requirements of particular applications running on the STA. For example, if Audio/Video streaming applications are running, a higher weight than normal should be used],
use environment [fig 9, par 0147, The policy 900 is settable using a station user interface as well as through group policies. Policies should be environment/location sensitive because the relevance/weight of factors is likely to vary based upon the environment/location of the computing device such as work, home, and public networks. For example, the cost per bit 920 factor value is assigned a weight of 0 for the work environment, but a higher weight is assigned for a public access point]
a relationship with another system [fig 9, par 0124, Connectivity (CON) 916: specifies a measure of connectedness to resources via a wireless interface. If a STA is aware, from earlier saved experience, of the kind of connectivity provided by certain 802.11a and 802.11b networks at a particular location, it can select (or apply a high factor value to) a network that provides better connectivity. In the absence of any indications to the contrary, two Wi-Fi technologies such as 802.11a and 802.11b advertising the same SSID offer similar connectivity],
and an operation[fig 9, par 0127, Application throughput requirements APPTHRPT 922: specifies a throughput needed by one or more particular active applications on a computing device to ensure proper operation of the applications on the device (STA) that will utilize the selected wireless technology. The STA determines the throughput requirements of the applications running on it based on quality of service attributes set by the applications. By way of example, in an energy conservation mode of operation],
and create a selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from among the plurality of wireless communication technologies corresponding to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces based on the information indicating wireless communication characteristics, the information set by the user, and an input by the user [par 0101, 0105, 0131, 0132, The selection framework derives factor values from acquired information elements (e.g., network status/capabilities) relating to multiple combinations of interface/network combinations available to a computing device. The factor values derived for each of the available combinations are then applied to an interface/network selection criterion. The criterion, by way of example, comprises a logical/arithmetic combination of weighted factor values. Applying the derived factor values for each interface/network option to the selection criterion renders a resulting interface/network selection for wireless network communications. In an exemplary embodiment, factor values are applied to an interface/network selection criterion to select between two Wi-Fi technologies, 802.11a and 802.11b. Furthermore, policy specifications are sufficiently rich to state, in cases where the minimum or maximum acceptable value for an overriding factor is not met by any interface, then the STA alerts a user, prompts the user, and accepts a manual selection in view of the unacceptable current status. The system keeps a history of user selections for ambiguous situations that are subsequently resolved through user input, and, if allowed by the policy, chooses to use this history of past user selections to resolve similar ambiguous situations in the future];
grasping communication qualities according to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces[fig 9, par 0115-0128, Having described a set of parameters and terms utilized to define wireless technology selection criteria according to a wireless technology selection framework described herein, representative factors and overall quality score (enumerated in Fig 9)];
and selecting a wireless communication interface corresponding to a wireless communication technology to be prioritized among the plurality of wireless communication technologies on the basis of the selection rule and the communication qualities[fig 11, par 0133, 0138, The information elements and selection criteria are acquired from a variety of sources. Turning to FIG. 10, a set of information element sources are identified. To determine values of some of the identified factors utilized by the wireless technology criteria, This list of sources of information and criteria that drive the selection process provided above is intended to be illustrative. Also, the present invention contemplates using global information such as priorities of data sets as set, for example, by an administrator through a management tool and/or by applications].
Response to Arguments
The factors in Figure 9 are derived from such network and system information elements of Figure 8. Bahl, however, does not create any selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from any information set by the user and/or user input as set forth in the claims. Thus, Bhal fails to disclose "creating a selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from among the plurality of wireless communication technologies corresponding to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces based on the information indicating wireless communication characteristics, the information set by the user, and an input by the user" as set forth in the present claims.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the above anticipation rejection because the cited reference fails to disclose each and every element of the claims.
The examiner respectfully disagrees Bhal disclose "creating a selection rule for selecting one wireless communication technology from among the plurality of wireless communication technologies corresponding to the plurality of wireless communication interfaces based on the information indicating wireless communication characteristics, in paragraphs 0101, 0105, 0131, 0132, shows, Applying the derived factor values for each interface/network option to the selection criterion renders a resulting interface/network selection for wireless network communications. In an exemplary embodiment, factor values are applied to an interface/network selection criterion to select between two Wi-Fi technologies, 802.11a and 802.11b.
Bhal shows the information set by the user, and an input by the user in paragraphs 0101, 0105, 0131, 0132, shows the STA alerts a user, prompts the user, and accepts a manual selection in view of the unacceptable current status. The system keeps a history of user selections for ambiguous situations that are subsequently resolved through user input, and, if allowed by the policy, chooses to use this history of past user selections to resolve similar ambiguous situations in the future.
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 JASON A HARLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5435. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-300 6:30-8:30.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/JASON A HARLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468