DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed December 17, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-17 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 17, 2025.
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 1-17 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.
Under the Step 1 of the Section 101 analysis, Claims 1-17 are drawn to a method which is within the four statutory categories (i.e., a process).
Since the claims are directed toward statutory categories, it must be determined if the claims are directed towards a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea). Based on consideration of all of the relevant factors with respect to the claim as a whole, claims 1-17 are determined to be directed to an abstract idea. The rationale for this determination is explained below:
Regarding Claim 1:
Claim 1 is drawn to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite “providing a processing program for fractionalizing an asset into tokens and for enabling a market for purchase and sale of the tokens, the processing program providing a visual interface for use by a plurality of buyers and sellers for offering to sell and purchase tokens representing fractions of assets; providing at least one collectable asset for fractionalizing into tokens using the processing program, the at least one collectable asset owned by an asset owner; and registering the at least one collectable asset with the processing program, registering including: fractionizing a plurality of blockchain tokens reflecting one hundred percent ownership of the collectible asset, the tokens entitling holders of the tokens to rights in a future disposition of the collectible asset, including a proportionate percentage of any future sale or insurance proceeds of the collectible asset.”
Under the Step 2A Prong One, the limitations, as underlined above, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity such as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). For example, but for the “processing program”, “visual interface”, and “blockchain tokens” language, the underlined limitations in the context of this claim encompass the human activity or mental processes. The series of steps belong to a typical sales activities or behaviors, because tokens for assets are processed for purchase and sale of the tokens representing assets.
Under the Step 2A Prong Two, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites additional elements – “A method of administering an online blockchain platform that allows users to purchase and sell tokens stored on a blockchain that are associated with a particular collectible asset, said blockchain providing a shared, immutable ledger that facilitates the process of recording transactions and tracking tokens of collectable assets in a decentralized network, comprising:”, “processing program”, “visual interface”, and “blockchain tokens”. The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., performing generic functions of an interaction) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, merely implementing an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Additionally, regarding the specification and claims, there is no improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field present, there is no applying or using the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition present, there is no implementing the judicial exception with or using the judicial exception in conjunction with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim present, there is no effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing present, and there is no applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment present such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Accordingly, these additional elements, individually or 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 are directed to an abstract idea.
Under the Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements in the process amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding Claims 2-17:
Dependent claims 2-3 and 11-12 only further elaborate the abstract idea and do not recite additional elements.
Dependent claims 4-10 and 13-17 include additional limitations, for example, “processing program” and “blockchain wallets” (Claim 4); “processing program” and “blockchain wallets” (Claim 5); “register a new asset page”, “public key”, “public blockchain key”, “wallet address”, and “blockchain network” (Claim 6); “register a new asset page” (Claim 7); “register a new asset page” (Claim 8); “register a new asset page” (Claim 9); “register a new asset page” (Claim 10); “processing program” (Claim 13); “processing program” (Claim 14); “processing program” (Claim 15); “motor vehicle” (Claim 16); and “motor vehicle”, “automobile”, “truck”, “boat”, and “motorcycle” (Claim 17), but none of these limitations are deemed significantly more than the abstract idea because, as stated above, they require no more than generic computer structures or signals to be executed, and do not recite any Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or Improvements to any other technology or technical field.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Furthermore, looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology, and their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation or implementing the judicial exception on a generic computer.
Therefore, whether taken individually or as an ordered combination, claims 2-17 are nonetheless rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sliwka (US 20210082044 A1) in view of Kikinis (US 20200099512 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Sliwka teaches A method of administering an online blockchain platform that allows users to purchase and sell tokens stored on a blockchain that are associated with a particular collectible asset, said blockchain providing a shared, immutable ledger that facilitates the process of recording transactions and tracking tokens of collectable assets in a decentralized network, comprising (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0068, 0151):
providing a processing program for fractionalizing an asset into tokens and for enabling a market for purchase and sale of the tokens, the processing program providing a visual interface for use by a plurality of buyers and sellers for offering to sell and purchase tokens representing fractions of assets (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0068, 0151, 0173, 0078 teach(es) the tokenization platform is configured to support a token-based lending system, whereby lenders may create virtual items corresponding to collateral (e.g., jewelry, collectible items, artwork, and the like); at least a subset of the transferred funds is tokenized in a manner that comports with the protocol supported by the tokenization platform and/or the distributed ledger corresponding thereto.. the ledger bridging system may tokenize one or more crypto coins (e.g., a bitcoin), any fraction of crypto coins, or any amount of currency in response to a request corresponding to the user; Upon the collateral token being generated, the ledger management system may update the distributed ledger to reflect the new collateral token and the ownership of the collateral token by the borrower. The collateral token may then appear in a digital wallet of the borrower.. the collateral token may be represented by a visual indicium in the digital wallet); providing at least one collectable asset for fractionalizing into tokens using the processing program, the at least one collectable asset owned by an asset owner (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0173, 0151 teach(es) The collateral item corresponding to the collateral token may be stored at the facility until the collateral token is redeemed. Once redeemed, the redeeming user (the borrower or a transferee of the collateral token) may pick up the collateral item from the facility or the collateral item may be shipped to thereto); and registering the at least one collectable asset with the processing program, registering including (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0173 teach(es) Upon the collateral token being generated, the ledger management system may update the distributed ledger to reflect the new collateral token and the ownership of the collateral token by the borrower. The collateral token may then appear in a digital wallet of the borrower.. the collateral token may be represented by a visual indicium in the digital wallet).
However, Sliwka does not explicitly teach fractionizing a plurality of blockchain tokens reflecting one hundred percent ownership of the collectible asset, the tokens entitling holders of the tokens to rights in a future disposition of the collectible asset, including a proportionate percentage of any future sale or insurance proceeds of the collectible asset.
Kikinis from same or similar field of endeavor teaches fractionizing a plurality of blockchain tokens reflecting one hundred percent ownership of the collectible asset, the tokens entitling holders of the tokens to rights in a future disposition of the collectible asset, including a proportionate percentage of any future sale or insurance proceeds of the collectible asset (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0043, 0059, 0093 teach(es) Cryptocurrencies are often referred to a digital currencies or virtual currencies, and the valuation associated with cryptocurrencies is often referred to as coins or tokens, with fractional parts of a coin or token typically being allowed to be transferred or utilized; Lower tiers of cryptocurrency would be allowed to handle only fractional currency, that is, currency that is a fraction of a whole currency unit, usually equivalent to coins).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Sliwka to incorporate the teachings of Kikinis for fractionizing a plurality of blockchain tokens reflecting one hundred percent ownership of the collectible asset, the tokens entitling holders of the tokens to rights in a future disposition of the collectible asset, including a proportionate percentage of any future sale or insurance proceeds of the collectible asset.
There is motivation to combine Kikinis into Sliwka because Kikinis’s teachings of fractional currency/transaction would facilitate to sell, buy, and exchange the collateral items/tokens (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0043, 0059, 0093).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein providing at least one asset for fractionalizing into tokens comprises: the asset owner proving title to the asset; the asset owner providing an appraisal of the asset, the asset obtained from an appraiser; and the asset owner providing proof of insurance on the asset up to at least the value of the appraisal (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0326, 0009 teach(es) the loan process smart contract instance may request a safekeeper to safekeep the appraised item and may instantiate an instance of a safekeeping smart contract, which executes a safekeeping workflow. In embodiments, the tokenization platform may assign a safekeeper to the safekeeping task, for example, based on the type of collateral item and/or the safekeeper's proximity to the collateral item; the safekeeper may be required to stake an amount of currency/tokenized tokens equal or proportionate to the appraised value of the collateral item as a safeguard in case the item is lost or damaged during safekeeping (or may provide proof of insurance)).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein the appraiser is a licensed appraiser (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0009, 0238 teach(es) to instantiate an appraisal smart contract instance that includes computer-readable instructions that are configured to manage an appraisal task that is performed by an appraiser to determine an appraisal value of the collateral item and to issue an appraisal notification upon confirming that the appraisal task has been completed; an authentication guild may include a set of individuals or organizations that have domain specific expertise authenticating a particular type (or types) of item(s)).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Sliwka further teaches further comprising using the processing program to enable users of the processing program to purchase tokens of the at least one collectable asset from the asset owner in an initial offering and thereby become holders of the tokens, the processing program associating purchased tokens with blockchain wallets of each holder of a token (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0078 teach(es) A user device may access the platform via a website, a web application, a native application, or the like. In embodiments, the platform may provide a first graphical user interface to user devices associated with a seller and a second graphical user interface to a user device associated with an end user. The first graphical user interface may allow a user associated with a seller to offer items for sale and to create new virtual representations corresponding to the items for sale. The second user interface may allow users to purchase tokens corresponding to items for sale, to transfer tokens, and/or redeem tokens).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Sliwka further teaches further comprising using the processing program to enable holders of tokens of the at least one collectable asset to offer to sell and to sell tokens to subsequent holders of tokens in a secondary market, the processing program associating purchased tokens with blockchain wallets of each subsequent holder of a token (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0061, 0078 teach(es) a contract/program may be invoked by a first party to make an offer to a second party or a group of potential contracting parties by instantiating a copy of a certain contract. Some contracts may provide for multiple parties, such as buyer, seller, lender, borrower, escrow agent, authenticator, appraiser, and/or the like, all of whom may independently interact with a particular instance of a smart contract to sign it, or to take other actions associated with a specific type of smart contract).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using a register a new asset page for recording an asset owner public key comprising a public blockchain key or wallet address of the asset owner; recording an asset type identifying the type of asset, recording a blockchain network on which the tokens will be created, generating a symbol that uniquely identifies the collectible asset, assigning a total fractions figure consisting of the number of tokens for the collectable asset (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0076-0078, 0106, 0173 teach(es) A user device may access the platform via a website, a web application, a native application, or the like; the seller may provide an item classification that indicates the type of item (e.g., “shoes,” “pizza,” “photograph,” “movie,” “concert tickets,” “gift card,” and the like) and a name of the item. The seller may then define one or more additional attributes of the item. For example, in embodiments, the seller may provide an item description, media contents associated with the item (e.g., photographs, videos, audio clips, and the like), relevant links (e.g., a link to a website of the seller), a price of the item, etc.).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; however the combination does not explicitly teach wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page for recording a vehicle identification number.
Kikinis further teaches wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page for recording a vehicle identification number (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0139, 0141, 0143 teach(es) This blockchain is then associated with the vehicle's assigned vehicle identification number (VIN), which incorporated the vehicle's manufacturer, geographical, and model information into an encoded string. This produces a uniquely-identifiable VIN for each vehicle that is now paired with a unique blockchain that describes the vehicle's manufacture in detail and cannot be altered, which provides the basis for a number of blockchain-based new methods such as for validating and recording vehicle repairs or maintenance).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis to incorporate the teachings of Kikinis for wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page for recording a vehicle identification number.
There is motivation to combine Kikinis into the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis because Kikinis’s teachings of VIN would facilitate to handle automobile-related transactions (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0139, 0141, 0143).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page for recording an appraised price of the collectable asset (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0250 teach(es) the appraisal stage-level governance may further refine the documentation rule to require that an appraiser file an appraisal report that indicates an appraised value and provide supporting documentation such as, for example, a condition of the collateral item (e.g., good condition, new condition, poor condition, or the like), whether the item is new or used, whether the item is in a deteriorated state, whether the item is working, evidence of past sales of similar items to support the appraised value).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page for recording a description of the collectable asset (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0075, 0084, 0106 teach(es) The virtual representation of the item may include information that identifies the item (e.g., a serial number corresponding to the item, a model number of the item, and the like), information relating to the item (e.g., a classification of the item, textual descriptions, images, audio, video, virtual reality data, augmented reality data, and the like), and/or code that may be used to facilitate or verify transactions involving the item (e.g., smart contracts)).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein registering a collectable asset further includes using the register a new asset page to associate media documentation with the assets, such as photos, appraisal documents, and insurance documents (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0106 teach(es) the seller may provide an item description, media contents associated with the item (e.g., photographs, videos, audio clips, and the like), relevant links (e.g., a link to a website of the seller), a price of the item, etc.).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above; and Sliwka further teaches further teaches wherein a default value for the total fractions is 100,000 (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0122 teach(es) the token generation system may generate identical tokens, where each token has the same token identifier. In these embodiments, the token generation system may generate a single token identifier, in the manner described above, and may generate N fungible tokens using that token identifier, where N is the number of total tokens).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein each asset owner maintains possession of their respective collectable asset and is responsible for maintaining a condition of the asset (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0074, 0250 teach(es) a token may be redeemed by an owner of the token, such that the owner of the token may take possession of the item upon redemption of the token; the safekeepers stage-level governance may further refine this rule to require that the safekeeper provide photograph evidence of the item in safe storage and fill out a safekeeping report that indicates any damage that was visible when the item was deposited by the owner (e.g., the borrower) and a verification by the owner of the item of said visible damage).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein an owner or licensed administrator of the processing system collects a royalty from an asset owner for registering an asset with the processing program (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0251 teach(es) the stage-level governance may further define that the primary authenticator gets a certain percentage (e.g., 60% or 70%) of the authentication fees/rewards and the remaining amount is split amongst the one or more secondary authenticators).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein an owner or licensed administrator of the processing system collects a transaction fee from buyers upon purchase of tokens (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0301 teach(es) the results of the pre-loan liquidation event indicate whether the item was sold, and if sold, a price at which the item was sold (minus any fees taken by the marketplace for hosting the sale)).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above; and Sliwka further teaches wherein an owner or licensed administrator of the processing system collects a transaction fee from sellers upon sale of tokens (Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0301, as stated above with respect to claim 14).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 7 above; however the combination does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one asset is a motor vehicle.
Kikinis further teaches wherein the at least one asset is a motor vehicle (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0238 teach(es) an automobile authentication guild may be comprised of individuals that have expertise authenticating limited edition automobiles).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis to incorporate the teachings of Kikinis for wherein the at least one asset is a motor vehicle.
There is motivation to combine Kikinis into the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis because Kikinis’s teachings of automobile for an asset would facilitate to handle motor vehicles for transactions (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0238).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis teaches all the limitations of claim 16 above; however the combination does not explicitly teach wherein the motor vehicle is an automobile, a truck, a boat or a motorcycle.
Kikinis further teaches wherein the motor vehicle is an automobile, a truck, a boat or a motorcycle (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0238, as stated above with respect to claim 16).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis to incorporate the teachings of Kikinis for wherein the motor vehicle is an automobile, a truck, a boat or a motorcycle.
There is motivation to combine Kikinis into the combination of Sliwka and Kikinis because Kikinis’s teachings of automobile for an asset would facilitate to handle motor vehicles for transactions (Kikinis: Paragraph(s) 0238).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 17, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 that “Without the process of the inventions, there would be no tokens, no practical market for tokens, no way to administer sales of tokens, and no way to track ownership in an automated and fail-safe manner,” examiner respectfully argues that the tokens are not defined or recited with technical details and contexts enough to integrated the abstract idea into a practical application or to provide any improvements to the functioning of the computer or other technology or technical field. The tokens, as recited in the claims, may be interpreted as a piece of data or information related to the ownership, and such tokens can be generated and processed manually by people. It is recommended for the applicant to amend the claims with further technical details and contexts of tokens, fractionalizing of the tokens, purchase and sale of the tokens, etc.
Regarding applicant’s argument under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 that “What both references lack, as far as applicant can determine, is any teaching, suggestion, motivation or reason to "fractionalize" the value of a particular asset through tokens, much less to apply such tokens to a system specific to collectible assets,” examiner respectfully argues that the Sliwka reference teaches the features, as stated above in the 103 rejections (See at least Sliwka: Paragraph(s) 0068, 0151, 0173, 0078). It is recommended for the applicant to amend the claims with more technical details and contexts of tokens, the particular collectible asset, selling and purchasing tokens, etc.
Regarding applicant’s argument that “Applicant's claimed method does not create loans, but instead creates, sells and administers fractional shares (tokens) in individual collectable assets,” examiner respectfully argues that Claim 1 is directed to fractionalizing of an asset into tokens or fractionizing of blockchain tokens without any more details and contexts of creating, selling, and administering of fractional shares. As stated above, applicant’s further amendments are recommended.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Auerbach (US 12093942 B1) teaches Systems, Methods, And Program Products For Modifying The Supply, Depositing, Holding, And/or Distributing Collateral As A Stable Value Token In The Form Of Digital Assets, including fractional amount of shares, 100,000 shares, royalty, and fee.
Quigley (US 20230274244 A1) teaches Trading Analytics For Cryptographic Tokens That Link To Real World Objects, including token, fractional ownership of the right, and wallet.
Harrison (US 20210217001 A1) teaches Decentralized Tokenization Technologies, including collectible, registration, insurance, owner, wallet, registered the asset token, collectors registry, an insurance company, and registering motorcycle-related asset tokens.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CLAY LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3309. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5pm EST.
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, Neha Patel can be reached at (571)270-1492. 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.
/CLAY C LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699