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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 3, 9 and 11. Claims 4-8 and 10 were withdrawn. Claim 2 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/12/2025, with respect to the 101 rejection has been considered but is not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on page 10, that claim 1 recites concrete, technology-specific components and operations that go well beyond a mere presentation of information or the organization of human activity. Applicant argues that the claim as a whole implements meaningful technical improvements.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim limitations as drafted, recite a concept, that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, is a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations are analogous to managing personal behavior or interactions between people (interactions between people), or a commercial or legal interaction (sales activity) such as managing corporations of drivers (specification, par. 0001). The generic computer implementations do not change the character of the limitations. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea. The additional elements (computer elements and interfaces) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Applicant argues, on page 10, that the claimed operations require a processor embedded in a specific device and therefore is tied to a particular machine.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the additional elements (computer elements and interfaces) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, they are not tied to a particular machine.
Applicant argues, on page 10, that the claims recite storing data only after confirming minimum required data imposes a technical constraint designed to maintain database integrity-an improvement that is neither abstract nor conventional.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the additional elements (computer elements and interfaces) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Additionally, storing and retrieving information in memory is considered well-understood routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05d)
Applicant argues, on page 11, that the claimed interaction with a data input completion object triggers verification logic upon a specific UI event. Applicant also argues, on page 11, the limitation "only when minimum required data ... storing input data in the database" requires a machine-implemented evaluation of whether storage conditions are satisfied. Applicant also argues a dynamic UI constraint for error prevention.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the additional elements (computer elements and interfaces) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The claims do not recite a triggering of verification logic upon a specific UI event. As mentioned above, storing and retrieving information in memory is considered well-understood routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05d)
Applicant argues, claim 1 requires (i) validation logic, database-based processing, event-driven operations, and device-level technical constraints; and (ii) technical improvements including automated error-prevention mechanisms and controlled data-storage operations that ensure data integrity.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and arguments of specific features are not recited in the claim limitations. Furthermore, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology. While the claim limitations may provide improvements to the business process of registering vehicles for a corporation, the alleged improvements do not provide any improvement to a technology or technical field.
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the 102 rejection have been considered and are persuasive. Examiner has withdrawn the 102 rejection. However, the art rejection has been updated in light of the amendments.
Applicant argues, on page 14, that Battleson relate to the types of assistance relate to the types of assistance provided-such as towing or roadside support-whereas the "vehicle-type products" in the present application correspond to the types of vehicles that may be provided. These concepts are fundamentally different, and therefore the Examiner's mapping is improper.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under the BRI, “vehicle type products” is a broad term which includes towing services and roadside assistance. There is no special definition in the specification for the “vehicle type products”. Therefore, towing vehicles or roadside assistance teaches the term of vehicle type products.
Applicant argues, on page 14, that the second corporation management interface is specifically for entering information for newly registered corporations and therefore the cited system would need to relate to inputting new information.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim limitations do not recite that the second interface must specifically for newly registered corporations. Examiner has mapped to a different interface of the cited art of Battleson and therefore it is not the same as the first interface recited in the claims.
Applicant’s arguments relating to the interface not requiring the user to manually construct and input all fields and that only when minimum required data for the corporation registration has been input is considered moot in light of the updated rejections. Nevertheless, Examiner notes that the claims do not claim anything about without requiring the user to manually construct and input all fields. Examiner has updated the rejection in light of the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claim 1, 3 and 11 is directed to a series of steps, and therefore is a process.
Claim 9 is directed to a system with multiple components, and therefore is a machine
Independent Claims
Step 2A Prong One
The limitation of Claim 1 recites:
A method of providing an interface for managing a vehicle operating corporation, … the method comprising:
displaying … comprising a 1-1st area configured to list data about one or more registered corporations, a 1-2nd area configured to set conditions for the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area, and a 1-3rd area configured to add data about a registered corporation … …;
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-2nd area to set corporation listing conditions, selecting data about one or more registered corporations that satisfy the corporation listing conditions, from among data about a plurality of registered corporations, and displaying the selected data about the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area; and
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-3rd area, displaying … for adding a registered corporation … and wherein the displaying … :
displaying … for inputting data about the registered corporation, the data comprising an operation provision region and a vehicle-type product, …;
in response to receiving an input of the operation provision region, determining one or more vehicle-type products that are providable in the input operation provision region to prevent data entry errors;
displaying the determined one or more vehicle-type products such that any one of the determined one or more vehicle-type products is selected; and
in response to receiving an input for interacting …, only when minimum required data for corporation registration has been input, storing input data … .
.
The limitation of Claim 9 recites:
display … comprising a 1-1st area configured to list data about one or more registered corporations, a 1-2nd area configured to set conditions for the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area, and a 1-3rd area configured to add data about a registered corporation …,
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-2nd area to set corporation listing conditions, select data about one or more registered corporations that satisfy the corporation listing conditions, from among data about a plurality of registered corporations, and
display the selected data about the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area, and in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-3rd area, display … for adding a registered corporation to … wherein the displaying … comprises:
displaying … for inputting data about the registered corporation, the data comprising an operation provision region and a vehicle-type product, …;
in response to receiving an input of the operation provision region, determining one or more vehicle-type products that are providable in the input operation provision region to prevent data entry errors;
displaying the determined one or more vehicle-type products such that any one of the determined one or more vehicle-type products is selected; and
in response to receiving an input for …, only when minimum required data for corporation registration has been input, storing input data in the ….
.
The claim limitations as drafted, recite a concept, that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, is a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations are analogous to managing personal behavior or interactions between people (interactions between people), or a commercial or legal interaction (sales activity) such as managing corporations of drivers. The generic computer implementations (see below) do not change the character of the limitations. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the following additional elements:
Claim 1:
a processor included in a device for providing an interface
the interface including a data input completion object
a first corporation management interface
database
a second corporation management interface
Claim 9:
A device for providing an interface for managing a vehicle operating corporation, the device comprising:
a database storing at least one program; and
a processor configured to execute the at least one program to
a first corporation management interface
database
a second corporation management interface
interface
the interface including a data input completion object
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h))
Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 3 and 11 further narrow the same abstract ideas recited in Claims 1. Therefore, claims 3 and 11 are directed to an abstract idea for the reasons given above.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the dependent claims recite the following additional elements:
Claim 3:
a third corporation management interface
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Battleson (US20190197647A1) and in further view of Abhyanker (US20160027307A1).
Claim 1: Battleson teaches A method of providing an interface for managing a vehicle operating corporation, performed by a processor included in the device for providing an interface (Battleson, Par. 0054: computing device), the method comprising:
displaying a first corporation management interface comprising a 1-1st area configured to list data about one or more registered corporations, a 1-2nd area configured to set conditions for the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area, and a 1-3rd area configured to add data about a registered corporation to a database included in the device for providing the interface; (Battleson, Fig. 2 and par. 0062; 0054)
Battleson, Fig. 2 and Par. 0062, shows a interface for managing companies (i.e. 1-1st area to list data about one or more registered corporations). On right side of the interface is an area listing the companies (i.e. 1-2nd area for the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area). On the left side information can be input to add data. (i.e. 1-3rd area to add data about a registered corporation to a database). The right hand side of interface 130 shows a list of all companies entered into the database, showing the company names, phone numbers, and addresses (which options themselves may be edited in another interface) and the number of entries displayed may be edited through the shown dropdown menu.
See also Battleson, Par. 0054 for database interaction.
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-2nd area to set corporation listing conditions, selecting data about one or more registered corporations that satisfy the corporation listing conditions, from among data about a plurality of registered corporations, and displaying the selected data about the one or more registered corporations to be listed in the 1-1st area; and (Battleson, Fig. 2 and par. 0062)
Battleson, Fig. 2 and Par. 0062, shows a interface, right hand side of interface 130 shows a list of all companies entered into the database, showing the company names, phone numbers, and addresses (which options themselves may be edited in another interface) and the number of entries displayed may be edited through the shown dropdown menu.
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 1-3rd area, displaying a second corporation management interface for adding a registered corporation to the database, and (Battleson, Par. 0079, Fig. 8)
Battleson, in Par. 0079, and fig. 8 shows a representative example of an administrator interface (user interface) (interface) (UI) 190 allowing the administrator to associate specific technicians with specific companies. The company indicator 132 for the selected company is shown, and the table below shows all drivers associated in the database with that company indicator. The table has a technician indicator field 191 (shown as a “Add Driver” field) which the administrator may select to input a driver's or technician's information, including a technician indicator 192. Edit and delete functions are shown, and for each driver it is seen that name, driver indicator (driver number), email, location, and phone are listed in a list. (i.e. second management interface for adding drivers in response to receiving input for interacting with an object in the 1-3 area, see instant app specification par. 0011-0012)
wherein the displaying of the second corporation management interface comprises:
displaying an interface for inputting data about the registered corporation, the data comprising an operation provision region and a vehicle-type product, the interface including a data input completion object; (Battleson, Fig. 3-Fig. 4 0063: region/area Syracuse, Buffalo, New York and tow truck/roadside dispatch)
Battleson, Par. 0063, teaches FIG. 3 illustrates a representative example of an administrator interface (user interface) (interface) (UI) 140 which may be accessed from the previous interface by selecting the “coverage area” selector from the top menu, and is an interface used to associate geographic areas with the company through the database. One of the companies shown on the previous interface, “Tom's Towing Inc.,” is the company associated with the geographic selections shown on this screen
in response to receiving an input of the operation provision region, determining one or more vehicle-type products that are providable in the input operation provision region (Battleson Fig. 3-4, Par. 0064-0066: roadside and tow services)
Battleson, Par. 0064, teaches interface 140 shows the company indicator 132 for the company associated with this specific interface, and the interface includes a map with zip codes and zip code boundaries shown. The zip codes are representative examples of geographic indicators 141 which may be associated with the company through the database—in other implementations the geographic indicators could be defined by county lines, city boundaries, city blocks or groups of city blocks, longitude and latitude, and so forth. Interface 140 is used to associate, through the database, selected geographic indicators 141 with a company indicator 132.
displaying the determined one or more vehicle-type products such that any one of the determined one or more vehicle-type products is selected; and (Battleson Fig. 5, Par. 0068: roadside and tow services)
Battleson, Par. 0068, teaches FIG. 5 shows a representative example of an administrator interface (user interface) (interface) (UI) 160 which is used to input other information and associate it with an entered company. The company indicator 132 is seen at the top of the screen, along with a variety of menu items. This interface may be arrived at by selecting a menu item on interface 150—for example the “settings” top menu item of user interface 150 (which may default to showing a “Define Services” interface—and then by selecting a visible “ETA Settings” menu item the user may arrive at interface 160). The “Back to Company Edit” menu item on interface 160 may be selected to return to interface 150. The “ETA Settings” interface 160 is used to define certain aspects of the operation of estimated times of arrival (ETAS) within the dispatching system. For background, in the representative example the “administrator” operating the dispatching system through the first computing device is a provider of dispatching services for roadside services and the “companies” entered into the system are various roadside service providers, though this is simply one representative example and the system could be used for any services which benefit from dispatching services.
While Battleson does not explicitly recite the data input completion object storing input data for the inputs in fig. 3 and fig. 4, it does show other interfaces such as fig. 11 and 12 which show saving inputs to a database and required fields.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interfaces of Battleson to include required fields and saving inputs to a database , as taught by Battleson, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Battleson does not teach but Abhyanker teaches the prevention of data entry errors in the context of a region and vehicle type products. (Abhyanker, Par. 0536)
Abhyanker, in Par. 0536, teaches the renter 114 may be able to request a ride using a data processing system (e.g., the renter device 505). In one embodiment, the user may go to m.OiaCar.com on the renter device's 505 web browser. The renter 114 may follow the instructions to sign up or sign in if they already have an account. The renter 114 may be able to type in an address where they would like to be picked up and then click “Search”. The renter 114 may select their preferred vehicle (e.g., private vehicle 104) from a drop-down menu labeled “Vehicle”. The renter 114 may click a “Yes, pick me up!” button to request their pickup and the nearest available driver may be sent to the requested address.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interfaces of Battleson to include dropdown selection of vehicles based on a location/address, as taught by Abhyanker, in order to have the nearest available driver may be sent to the requested address. (Abhyanker, Par. 0536)
Claim 9: Claim 9 is directed to a system. Claim 9 recites limitations that are parallel in nature as those addressed above for claim 1 which is directed towards a system. Claim 9 is therefore rejected for the same reasons as set forth above for claim 1. Additionally, the computer elements are disclosed by Battleson in par. 0054 and Fig. 1.
Claim 11: Battleson and Abhyanker teaches A computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon a program for causing a computer to execute the method of claim 1. (Battleson, Par. 0054, 0082 and Fig.1)
Claims 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Battleson (US20190197647A1) and in further view of Abhyanker (US20160027307A1) and in further view of Zhang (US20200402089A1)
Claim 3: Battleson and Abhyanker teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising:
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object indicating a corporation identifier (ID) of a particular corporation among the one or more registered corporations listed in the 1-1st area, displaying a third corporation management interface comprising a 2-1st area configured to display data about the particular corporation and modify or delete the data about the particular corporation, a 2-2nd area configured to list data about one or more affiliated drivers belonging to the particular corporation, and a 2-3rd area configured to set conditions for the one or more affiliated drivers to be listed in the 2-2nd area; and (Battleson, Fig. 8 and 9 and Par. 0079-0080: shows a representative example of an administrator interface (user interface) (interface) (UI) 190 allowing the administrator to associate specific technicians with specific companies. The company indicator 132 for the selected company is shown, and the table below shows all drivers associated in the database with that company indicator. The table has a technician indicator field 191 (shown as a “Add Driver” field) which the administrator may select to input a driver's or technician's information, including a technician indicator 192. Edit and delete functions are shown, and for each driver it is seen that name, driver indicator (driver number), email, location, and phone are listed in a list.)
in response to receiving an input for interacting with an object included in the 2-3rd area to set driver listing conditions, loading data about one or more affiliated drivers who satisfy the driver listing conditions from the database, and displaying the loaded data about the one or more affiliated drivers to be listed in the 2-2nd area. (Battleson, Fig. 8-9 0079-0080: shows a representative example of an administrator interface (user interface) (interface) (UI) 200 which allows the administrator to select an area (here Syracuse), and select the geographic indicators 141 by clicking in a geographic indicator field 231, similar to that previously described with respect to FIG. 3, but in this case the database is associating a specific driver with a specific technician group indicator 162 (first, second, third, etc.) for specific geographic indicators 141. The topmost “Select Units for Driver” dropdown menu allows the administrator to select the various technician group indicators one at a time and add all geographic indicators desired for that driver for that technician group indicator. It can be seen from FIG. 9 that the technician indicator 192 is seen on the screen. UI 200 thus associates, in the database, the technician group indicators with specific geographic indicators for a specific area for a specific technician indicator.)
While Battleson and Abhyanker teach claim 1 and Battleson teaches the limitations of claim 3 as cited above, they do not teach but Zhang teaches the limitations of:
configured to list data about one or more affiliated vehicles belonging to the particular corporation, including a vehicle ID, a license plate number, a line, a vehicle trim and a seat type, and a 2-5th area configured to set conditions for the one or more affiliated vehicles to be listed in the 2-4th area; (Zhang, Par. 0030 and Fig. 3)
Zhang, Par. 0030 and Fig. 3, teaches vehicle information page in accordance with embodiments of the present invention is depicted, and referred to generally by reference numeral 300. In some embodiments, page 300 is presented to the user when adding a vehicle to a trip on page 200. In other embodiments, the user has a separate vehicle inventory page from which to select vehicles for adding to trips, and page 300 is available to add vehicles to the vehicle inventory. A variety of information about the vehicle can be provided on page 300 in order to enable the driver to locate the vehicle when it is picked up, or for other purposes. As depicted, information about the car can include an inventory stock number, the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), the year, make, model, color and trim level of the car may be included. In other embodiments, other information (such as, for example, the vehicle's number of doors or seats, or the type of transmission) may be included instead or in addition. In some embodiments, a free-form “notes” field may also be included to record information such as damage to the vehicle or special instructions to the driver of the vehicle. In some such embodiments, multiple such “notes” fields can be present for the requestor and driver to each add their own information about the vehicle. As discussed below, certain vehicles may require additional qualifications for drivers, which may also be noted in page 300.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interfaces of Battleson to include specific details of vehicles being registered, as taught by Zhang, in order to could include a gate code or vehicle bay number where the car is to be picked up or dropped off; similarly, the driver could indicate that damage is present when the vehicle is picked up or that the color for the vehicle does not match the description given. (Zhang, Par. 0029)
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 ISMAIL A MANEJWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-8904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Nathan Uber can be reached at 571-270-3923. 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.
/ISMAIL A MANEJWALA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628