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 office action is in response to claim amendments filed on 10/22/2025 in relation to application 18/388,549.
The instant application claims benefit to provisional application #63/424,630 with a priority date of 11/11/2022.
The Pre-Grant publication US 20240161648 is published on 5/16/2024.
Claims 1-21 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/22/2025 has been entered.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Rosenberg teaches the claimed invention is to a process (claim 1—11,20) and a computer devices (12-20) and thus fall within one of the four statutory categories (Step 1: YES).
Claims 1, 12, 21 are directed to a method for generating a plurality of customized learning programs and deploying that include receiving, selecting, arranging, setting generating a first, second different customized learning program based on a role criteria and deploying a plurality of customized learning programs on platforms. All of these involve steps drawn to concept categorized as an actions that are receiving, observing, identifying, evaluating and judging of inputs. A concept that are mental processes and by including receiving and generating customized learning materials, deploying and processing of information for some post-solution activities, they are like organizing of certain human activities. They are generally categorized as a grouping of an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1 YES).
The independent and dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be significantly more than the judicial exception because the limitations of “a computer system with interface display”, “a processor’, “a memory’, "network remote storage", " a first set of learning materials based at least in part upon a first role of a plurality of roles”, “selecting a second/third/fourth set of learning materials based at least in part upon a respective role of the plurality of roles”, “generating a set of verification processes based at least in part upon the set of learning materials”, “setting one or more visibility properties of the customized learning program”,” updating a learning program ontology associated with the customized learning program” are merely use of generic computer peripheral, functions and processing of analysis by known machine. The dependent claims are further simply interchanging of learning materials and roles for third and fourth set, generating quiz, tracking progress , causing presentation and visibility criteria for identified groups. No improvement on computer functionalities found. Hence not indicative of integration of a practical application (Step 2A: Prong 2 No).
The steps in the recited claims that are highlighted are a well-understood, routine, and conventional activities known in art. Fig.2 of the instant specification discloses computing device with generic hardware to implement the process claimed here. Application figures 3,4 specification clearly indicate that conventional foundry ontology and building of application with various screen shots of the embodiment presented in the invention. Learning programs and management control, here in the instant case, are activities done on generic personal computers, server computer systems, use of hand-held or laptop devices by students, multiprocessor systems, network PCs. Storing, analyzing and retrieval of routine sessions from working panes are already known activities in art. For example in case of Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, the activities of storing and retrieving of information in a memory of consumer electronic for a field of use purposes are recognized to be computer functions well-understood, routine, and conventional, when they are claimed in a merely generic manner. Further, there found to be no additional elements here in the claim recitation that improves the functioning of a computer itself to overcome the abstract idea rejection (Step 2B: No).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Number US 10739951 B2 Rosenberg in view of US Patent Application Publication Number US 11750717 B2 to Walsh; James et al. (Walsh).
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 10739951 B2 Rosenberg.
Claim 1. Rosenberg teaches a method for generating a plurality of customized learning programs (col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning), the method comprising:
receiving a plurality of learning materials for a target platform (col.62 lines 26-30 learning materials directed to a targeted development environment corresponding Presentation Environment, and Aids to Productive Thought that can be implemented in various suitable electronic environments such in an overlay setting permitting note-taking, handles richer non-linear outlines and multiple themes, and search; opening contributions by students, teacher, parents and others; also supporting information sharing);
selecting a first set of learning materials based at least in part upon a first role of a plurality of roles (col. 23 lines 41-51 roles selection);
generating a first customized learning program comprising one or more first learning steps using the first set of learning materials (col. 59 lines 5-15 generating customized electronic book learning materials and programs in sequential program);
selecting a second set of learning materials based at least in part upon a second role of the plurality of roles, the second role being different from the first role, the second set of learning materials being different from the first set of learning materials (col.187 lines 25-40 at least first and second set of roles);
generating a second customized learning program comprising one or more second learning steps using the second set of learning materials (col. 188 lines 2-13 option tree for learning program steps and set); and
deploying , to a user system, a plurality of customized learning programs comprising the first customized learning program and the second customized learning program (col. 78 lines 41- 45 continuity of construct maintained on user system deploy and redeployment);
integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with an instance of the target platform that runs on the user system (col.161 lines 30-35 integration of diverse translated platforms allowing shared information);
Rosenberg teaches the overlay builder interfaces that can display customized learning content using its own integrated capabilities. (col.56 lines 1-10, col.138 lines 48-54 comments can be stored by the overlay builder in an associated proprietary file format associated with the overlay builder, and then displayed by the overlay builder 56 in a separate window 64, or a pop-up window of the overlay builder 56; underlying content may similarly be displayed). But a target platform that runs on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems is not explicitly observed to be identified in Rosenberg. Walsh, however teaches the target platforms that run on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems (Fig.2 elements 202, 208, 220 Security and integration components 208 may correspond to separate hardware and software components which may be operated at a separate physical location and/or by a separate entity i.e. integrating plurality of customized programs with another instance of the target platforms or server components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate integrating plurality of customized programs with a second instance of the target platforms or server components, as taught by Walsh, into the system of Rosenberg, in order to provide a global architecture capable to build and deploy a microservice instance integrating each course-recipient-user platforms.
wherein the method is performed using one or more processors (Rosenberg: col. 60 lines 65 word processors).
Claim 2. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first customized learning program is generated using a first ontology associated with a first organization (Col.7 lines 49-53 first and second alternative organizations; Col.8 lines 61-66 first ontology could be the dataset at nodes and connectors in the electronic textbook have both ontology associated to verbal and visual qualities. Rosenberg teaches the nodes can have meaning and texts that are attached to them like titles in an outline ; col.200 lines 36-50 electronic textbook models has an ontology to what it is).
{ Definition: An Ontology is the study of what is. Data may not solely exist in the form of hypertext documents and hyperlinks between them. Rather, data should be viewed as what it represents — people, places, events, ideas, activities and so on — and linked in a human-readable way. The instant specification in paragraph 0030 indicates that an ontology may refer to a structural framework (e.g., data model) containing information and data related to objects and relationships of objects (e.g., functions applicable to objects, links) within a specific domain (e.g., an organization, an industry and in some embodiments, the ontology includes one or more processing logics applied to one or more objects (e.g., workflows) etc.}
Claim 3. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising:
selecting a third set of learning materials based at least in part upon the first role of a plurality of roles and a second ontology associated with a second organization different from the first organization ( Fig.19 3-layer custom map based on the role of instructions- basic, general and advance);
generating a third customized learning program comprising one or more third learning steps using the third set of learning materials for the first role in the second organization (materials (Fig.19,col.168 lines 49-57 third dashed path);
selecting a fourth set of learning materials based at least in part upon the second role of the plurality of roles and the second ontology associated with the second organization, the fourth set of learning materials being different from the third set of learning materials (col.168 lines 58-59 fourth dashed path);
generating a fourth customized learning program comprising one or more fourth learning steps using the fourth set of learning materials for the first role in the second organization (Fig. 16 large display presenting a panorama field and a context gatherer field in accordance with one embodiment where materials may correspond to third and fourth learning programs).; and
deploying, to one or more second users of the target platform in the second organization, the plurality of customized learning programs comprising the third customized learning program and the fourth customized learning program (Fig.19 multiple path of progression can include third customized learning program and the fourth customized learning program).
Claim 4. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a first set of quiz questions based at least in part upon the first set of learning materials (col.166 lines 1-2 quiz question set ) .
Claims 5. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 4, further comprising: causing a presentation of the first set of quiz questions to a user after the user completes the first customized learning program (col.166 lines 1-2 quiz question assess learning characteristics).
Claim 6. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising: tracking a learning progress of the user based at least in part upon a response to the first set of quiz questions (col.166 lines 1-6 quiz map to assess learning characteristics).
Claim 7. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 6, further comprising: causing a presentation of the learning progress of the user on a management interface, the management interface includes one or more learning progresses of one or more users in a group (col.22 lines 2-7 tracking learning progress managed through interface interactions).
Claim 8. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first customized training program includes a learning program ontology (Col.8 lines 61-66 first ontology for example could be the dataset at nodes and connectors in the electronic textbook have both ontology associated to verbal and visual qualities for a learning program. Rosenberg teaches the nodes can have meaning and texts that are attached to them like titles in an outline ; col.200 lines 36-50 electronic textbook models has an ontology to what it is).
Claim 9. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the one or more first learning steps are in a specific order (col.20 lines 19-20 presentation in order of instruction materials).
Claim 10. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: setting a visibility property of the first customized learning program; wherein the first customized learning program is visible by a first group ((col.22 lines 7-22 visibility arrangement; col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning); wherein the first customized learning program is invisible by a second group different from the first group (col.22 lines 7-22 only personalized visibility arrangement to customized program).
Claim 11. Rosenberg teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a prompt; generating, using a large language model based on the prompt, a detailed description of at least one of the plurality of customized learning programs; and creating, based on the detailed description, the at least one of the plurality of customized learning programs (col.22 lines 33-50 prompt based on large language model from textbook query helping the student how to move forward).
Claim 12. Rosenberg teaches a system for generating a plurality of customized learning programs (col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning), the system comprising: one or more memories having instructions stored therein; and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions and perform operations comprising: receiving a plurality of learning materials for a target platform (col.62 lines 26-30 learning materials directed to a targeted development Environment , a corresponding Presentation Environment, and Aids to Productive Thought that can be implemented in various suitable electronic environments); selecting a first set of learning materials based at least in part upon a first role of a plurality of roles; generating a first customized learning program comprising one or more first learning steps using the first set of learning materials; selecting a second set of learning materials based at least in part upon a second role of the plurality of roles, the second role being different from the first role, the second set of learning materials being different from the first set of learning materials; generating a second customized learning program comprising one or more second learning steps using the second set of learning materials; and deploying a plurality of customized learning programs comprising the first customized learning program and the second customized learning program (program (col. 78 lines 41- 45 continuity of construct maintained on user system deploy and redeployment);
integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with an instance of the target platform that runs on the user system (col.161 lines 30-35 integration of diverse translated platforms allowing shared information)
Rosenberg teaches the overlay builder interfaces that can display customized learning content using its own integrated capabilities. (col.56 lines 1-10, col.138 lines 48-54 comments can be stored by the overlay builder in an associated proprietary file format associated with the overlay builder, and then displayed by the overlay builder 56 in a separate window 64, or a pop-up window of the overlay builder 56. The underlying content may similarly be displayed). But a target platform that runs on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems is not explicitly observed to be identified in Rosenberg. Walsh, however teaches the target platforms that run on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems (Fig.2 elements 202, 208, 220 Security and integration components 208 may correspond to separate hardware and software components which may be operated at a separate physical location and/or by a separate entity i.e. integrating plurality of customized programs with another instance of the target platforms or server components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate integrating plurality of customized programs with a second instance of the target platforms or server components, as taught by Walsh, into the system of Rosenberg, in order to provide a global architecture capable to build and deploy a microservice instance integrating each course-recipient-user platforms.
Claim 13. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the first customized learning program is generated using a first ontology associated with a first organization ontology (Col.8 lines 61-66 first ontology for example could be the dataset at nodes and connectors in the electronic textbook have both ontology associated to verbal and visual qualities for a learning program. Rosenberg teaches the nodes can have meaning and texts that are attached to them like titles in an outline ; col.200 lines 36-50 electronic textbook models has an ontology to what it is).
Claim 14. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the operations further comprise: selecting a third set of learning materials based at least in part upon the first rote of a plurality of roles and a second ontology associated with a second organization different from the first organization; generating a third customized learning program comprising one or more third learning steps using the third set of learning materials for the first role in the second organization; selecting a fourth set of learning materials based at least in part upon the second role of the plurality of roles and the second ontology associated with the second organization, the fourth set of learning materials being different from the third set of learning materials; generating a fourth customized learning program comprising one or more fourth learning steps using the fourth set of learning materials for the first role in the second organization; and deploying, to one or more second users of the target platform in the second organization, the plurality of customized learning programs comprising the third customized learning program and the fourth customized learning program (col.62 lines 26-30 learning materials directed to a targeted development Environment , a corresponding Presentation Environment, and Aids to Productive Thought that can be implemented in various suitable electronic environment; (Fig.19,col.168 lines 49-59 third and fourth dashed path for various roles and organizations);
selecting a fourth set of learning materials based at least in part upon the second role of the plurality of roles and the second ontology associated with the second organization, the fourth set of learning materials being different from the third set of learning materials (Col.8 lines 61-66 first/second different associated ontology could be a dataset at nodes and connectors in the electronic textbook both having verbal and visual qualities; col.24 organization of paths).
Claim 15. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise: generating a first set of quiz questions based at least in part upon the first set of learning materials (col.166 lines 1-2 quiz question assess learning characteristics).
Claim 16. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise :causing a presentation of the first set of quiz questions to a user after the user completes the first customized learning program ((col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning;col.166 lines 1-6 quiz map to assess learning characteristics).
Claim 17. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 16, wherein the operations further comprise: tracking a learning progress of the user based at least in part upon a response to the first set of quiz questions (col.166 lines 1-13 quiz map assessment stores that could be tracked learning characteristics)..
Claim 18. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 17, wherein the operations further comprise: causing a presentation of the learning progress of the user on a management interface, the management interface includes one or more learning progresses of one or more users in a group (col.22 lines 2-7 tracking learning progress managed through interface interactions).
Claim 19. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise: setting a visibility property of the first customized learning program (col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning; wherein the first customized learning program is visible by a first group; wherein the first customized learning program is invisible by a second group different from the first group (col.22 lines 7-22 only personalized visibility arrangement to customized program).
Claim 20. Rosenberg teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving a prompt; generating, using a large language model based on the prompt, a detailed description of at least one of the plurality of customized learning programs; and creating, based on the detailed description, the at least one of the plurality of customized learning programs (col.22 lines 33-50 prompt based on large language model from textbook query helping the student how to move forward).
Claim 21. Rosenberg teaches a method for generating a plurality of customized learning programs (col. 99 lines 26-34 customized learning), the method comprising: receiving a plurality of learning materials for a target platform;
for each user in a plurality of users (col.62 lines 26-30 learning materials directed to a targeted development Environment , a corresponding Presentation Environment, and Aids to Productive Thought that can be implemented in various suitable electronic environments):
selecting a set of learning materials based at least in part upon a role of a plurality of roles, arranging the set of learning materials in a specific order, generating a set of verification processes based at least in part upon the set of learning materials, generating a customized learning program comprising one or more learning steps using the set of learning materials, setting one or more visibility properties of the customized learning program (col.22 lines 7-22 only personalized visibility arrangement to customized program), creating or updating a learning program ontology associated with the customized learning program, and creating a description of the customized learning program; and
deploying, to plural of user systems, a plurality of customized learning programs comprising the customized learning programs generated for the plurality of users; wherein the method is performed using one or more processors (Col.8 lines 61-66 first/second different associated ontology could be a dataset at nodes and connectors in the electronic textbook both having verbal and visual qualities; col.24 organization of paths) and
integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with an instance of the target platform that runs on the user system (col.161 lines 30-35 integration of diverse translated platforms allowing shared information)
Rosenberg teaches the overlay builder interfaces that can display customized learning content using its own integrated capabilities. (col.56 lines 1-10, col.138 lines 48-54 comments can be stored by the overlay builder in an associated proprietary file format associated with the overlay builder, and then displayed by the overlay builder 56 in a separate window 64, or a pop-up window of the overlay builder 56. The underlying content may similarly be displayed). But a target platform that runs on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems is not explicitly observed to be identified in Rosenberg. Walsh, however teaches the target platforms that run on a first user system and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that also runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems (Fig.2 elements 202, 208, 220 Security and integration components 208 may correspond to separate hardware and software components which may be operated at a separate physical location and/or by a separate entity i.e. integrating plurality of customized programs with another instance of the target platforms or server components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate integrating plurality of customized programs with a second instance of the target platforms or server components, as taught by Walsh, into the system of Rosenberg, in order to provide a global architecture capable to build and deploy a microservice instance integrating each course-recipient-user platforms.
wherein the method is performed using one or more processors (col. 60 lines 65 word processors).
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant's arguments/amendments filed on October 22, 2025 have been considered.
Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as necessitated by amendments changing the scope of the claims.
35USC101
Applicant on pages 8-14 indicates that the amended claim 1 do not recite a mental process when they are directed to inventions that could not, as a practical matter, be performed entirely in a human's mind. Examiner agree but finds that some concepts such as to include observations to select learning materials related to first and second role, evaluating and judging programs so that the opinion is to integrate on target platforms are part of mental processes. These concepts fall into the category of a mental process. Furthermore receiving a plurality of learning materials, selecting a first set of learning materials based at least in part upon a first role of a plurality of roles, generating a first customized learning program comprising one or more first learning steps using the first set of learning materials tends to indicate certain methods of organizing human activity so that the claims appear to be directed to an abstract idea.
Applicant has correctly indicated that if additional elements demonstrating the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application is when the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field.
Examiner however finds that here computer "generating a first customized learning program comprising one or more first learning steps using the first set of learning materials", or "generating a second customized learning program comprising one or more second learning steps using the second set of learning materials", or “deploying, to a plurality of user systems, a plurality of customized learning programs comprising the first customized learning program and the second customized learning program," or even "integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a instances of the target platform that runs on a user system for plurality of users" is comprising of steps that are commonly used by skilled person in art. Even a computing system ability to provide a more robust and flexible pathways to allow the user learning skills from a customized learning programs are part of collecting data (e.g., customized learning materials), analyzing that data (e.g., deploeing a model), and providing an output based on that analysis (e.g., generate integration with instances of target platform) for results that are being used by generic computers.
In regard to “integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with an instance of the target platform that runs on the user system” (emphasis added) that likewise does not render “significantly more” nor “unconventional” since there are limited disclosure that elaborates on how to make and/or use this part of their invention. So, it is to it must be well-known, routine, and conventional (WRC). It appears that this may tend to be a “customized learning programs” by combination or by integration into some other software instantiations. Integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a plurality of target platform instances in a plurality of user systems e.g., for first and second user systems are common in art (Walsh et al. US 11,750,717; Fig.2 elements 206, 220 208 various security and integration components may be used to send and manage communications between the server and user devices integrating over one or more communication networks).
Applicant also indicated that the claims are directed to a technical solution to solve the technical problem for generating customized learning software program to be deployed to software platforms. Examiner respectfully traverses the argument and would like to indicate that though computer recited platform deployment on user system, there is only learning or teaching interactions happening on generic interfaces. There is known adaptability to target system found but no determination of technology improvement that could elevate the functionalities of computers. No indication of special manner or specific details found in which a new computer user interface could function. Use of common computers does not necessarily preclude the claim from reciting an abstract idea.
Applicant had also previously recited specific improvements to the technical field of generating customized training programs in multiple computing systems by, for example, "generating a first customized learning program comprising one or more first learning steps using the first set of learning materials, “generating a second customized learning program comprising one or more second learning steps using the second set of learning materials, “deploying, to a plurality of user system. But examiner finds that applicant has only deployed customized learning software programs for well-known, routine, and conventional purpose of different user platforms, from already existing compatible platforms for customized learning program. See, e.g., the CAFC’s opinion in Ultramercial in regard to how embodying an abstract idea on similar such elements or interfaces does not claim ‘significantly more’ than an abstract idea. Thus 35USC101 rejection in maintained.
35USC102
Applicant on pages 14,15 cited the amended claim 1 recites, inter alia, "deploying, to a user system, a plurality of customized learning programs comprising the first customized learning program and the second customized learning program; and integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with an instance of the target platform that runs on the user system." The amendment further illustrates that a target platform that runs on a first user system integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems. Hence overcome 35USC102 rejections.
Though this may overcome the instant anticipation rejections, examiner finds that the overlay used to generates a translation platform in primary prior art Rosenberg could easily be adapted to a widely used translators and adaptation around the world, allowing them to share information and support one another's projects. Hence a person with ordinary skills in art could conveniently find a deployment of target platform that runs on a first user system integrating the plurality of customized learning programs with a second instance of the target platform that runs on a second user system of the plurality of user systems as the availability of adapting platform to user system I becoming more and more common in use (Walsh Fig.2 elements 202, 208, 220 Security and integration of computer components).
Hence 35USC103 rejection is included.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADARUZ ZAMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3137. Rosenberg teaches the examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm CST.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached on (571) 272-7147. Rosenberg teaches 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.
/S.Z/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
December 11, 2025
/XUAN M THAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights