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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/8/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/8/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with the amendment have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that:
With respect to claim 1, the Office Action alleges Gupta discloses features related to presenting a view of a video conferencing layout of a third-party video conferencing application in a user interface of a collaboration environment, at FIG. 2A and paragraphs 83, 90, and 91. [Office Action, p. 2 and 6]. In particular, the Office Action alleges "the collaborative work environment (element 200) is shown to have a third party video conferencing interface included within it." [Office Action, p. 2]. Applicant disagrees; Gupta fails to disclose these very features. Nevertheless, claim 1 is amended as shown in the above listing to further distinguish the claimed subject matter from Gupta.
For example, the amended claim recites features of "third-party resources
managed by third-party servers" which are deemed "third-party" to a system comprising a server hosting a collaboration environment by virtue of the "third-party servers"" operating outside of the system which includes the server managing the environment state information."
With respect to FIG. 2A in Gupta, "FIG. 2A depicts the collaborative work environment 200 that includes, as one example, a third-party video conferencing platform 200a that is communicably coupled to a bridge service 200b which, in turn, is communicably coupled to one or more collaboration tools 200c." [Gupta, FIG. 2A, 91]. Moreover, "the bridge service 200b can obtain information from one or more collaboration tools 200c to input to a video conference, such as via a chat window of the third-party video conferencing platform 200a...." [Id.].
Gupta fails to describe at least the amended claim features because Gupta does not describe a scenario where a layout of a third-party video conferencing interface is added into a (first-party) user interface of a collaboration environment. Indeed, since the collaboration work environment 200 in FIG. 2A "includes" the "third-party video conferencing platform," the "video conferencing platform" cannot be "third-party" to the collaboration work environment 200. [Gupta, FIG. 2A, 91]. This follows from the basic principle that an element cannot be "third-party" to the very system in which it is expressly included. Accordingly, even if the "video conferencing platform" is considered "third-party" to the "one or more collaboration tools," it certainly is not, and cannot be, "third-party" to the "collaboration work environment 200." [Gupta, FIG. 2A, 91].
The Examiner cannot concur with the Applicant. The Examiner is interpreting “third party” as recited in the claims to be third party in at least some respect. Applicant argues above that the third party video conferencing of Gupta cannot be third party to the collaboration work environment because information from the third party video conferencing interface is included within the collaboration work environment However, Applicant’s claim 1 currently recites " third party content embedded within the collaboration environment". Claim 1 requires that the “third party content” must be “within the collaboration environment”. Gupta explicitly recites that the video conferencing meeting tool is third party (Gupta, ¶0083).
The remainder of Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections under prior art have been fully considered and are moot in view of the above or in view of new ground(s) of rejection, as necessitated by amendment, as outlined below.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites “operating outside of the system”. However, no “system” has been previously introduced. It is unclear what is encompassed by “the system” in this case. As a result of this antecedent basis ambiguity, the scope of the claim is rendered indefinite.
Dependent claims incorporate all of the limitations of their respective independent or intervening claim(s) and are rejected on the same basis.
Prior Art
Listed herein below are the prior art references relied upon in this Office Action:
Gupta et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0207489), referred to as Gupta herein [included in Applicant’s IDS dated 10/10/2023].
Greenblatt et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2015/0193392), referred to as Greenblatt herein [previously recited].
Examiner’s Note
Strikethrough notation in the pending claims has been added by the Examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta in view of Greenblatt.
Regarding claim 1, Gupta discloses a system configured to effectuate sets of automated actions within a collaboration environment based on trigger events derived from third-party content embedded in the collaboration environment, the system comprising: one or more physical processors of a server configured by machine-readable instructions to (Gupta, ¶0083, ¶0168 – processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory. Fig. 1 with ¶0082-¶0083 - Collaborative work environment Element 100. The Third Party Meeting Tool, Bridge Service, and Collaboration Tool are each instantiated over different, independent, and distinct physical hardware, including instantiation within independent server systems. In this case, the “system” can be the Collaboration Tool or The Bridge Service and Collaboration Tool. ¶0013 – third-party video conferencing platform. ¶0051-¶0062 – issue tracking tool can track tasks triggered by interaction from users in the collaboration environment):
manage, by the server, environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the collaboration environment being configured to facilitate interaction by users with the collaboration environment through a user interface of the collaboration environment (Gupta, ¶0035-¶0037 – team-generated content is input into the collaboration tool. ¶0026, ¶0073 – tasks are managed by the collaboration tool. Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7A-7B, and 8 with ¶0016-¶0018, ¶0021-¶0022 – users can interact with the collaborative work environment via a user interface),
the environment state information including work unit records
environment (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – issue tracking tool can track tasks added during interaction by users in the collaboration environment. The environment parameters include issues or tasks and users),
the third-party resources including a video conferencing application provided by a first third-party server operating outside of the system which includes the server managing the environment state information (Gupta, Fig. 2A, 3 with ¶0091, ¶0116-¶0118, ¶0143 – third-party video conference content is embedded with the collaboration environment. Data can be retrieved for embedding via API calls to third party services. Fig. 1 with ¶0082-¶0083 - the Third Party Meeting Tool, Bridge Service, and Collaboration Tool are each instantiated over different, independent, and distinct physical hardware, including instantiation within independent server systems);
obtain, by the server and from the video conferencing application, first information characterizing a video conferencing layout of a third-party user interface of the video conferencing application; update, by the server, the video conferencing system. A response from the collaboration tool is embedded in the chat interface. Both the command and the response are displayed as part of the video conference interface layout, and are formatted according to the collaboration software format. See also ¶0030-¶0032, ¶0037, ¶0091, ¶0108, ¶0127 – screen sharing and document sharing of the third-party interface streamed by users during the session);
effectuate presentation of the user interface of the collaboration environment through which the users interact with the collaboration environment (Gupta, Fig. 1 with ¶0083 – collaborative work environment. Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7A-7B, and 8 with ¶0016-¶0018, ¶0021-¶0022 – users can interact with the collaborative work environment via a user interface);
effectuate presentation of a video conferencing view in the user interface of the collaboration environment through which the users interact with the video conferencing application (Gupta, Fig. 2A with ¶0083, ¶0090 – collaborative work environment includes a video conference application interface),
wherein the user interface presents the values of the environment parameters and the
wherein the third-party content obtained from the video conferencing application is obtained by the server by performing one or more application programming interface calls to the video conferencing application, obtaining one or more responses from the video conferencing application, and updating the values of
detect an occurrence of a first trigger event, wherein the first trigger event is associated with automation information that specifies a first set of automated actions to carry out within the collaboration environment in response to the first trigger event derived from the third-party content of the video conference application displayed within the user interface of the collaboration environment in the same video conferencing layout as the video conferencing layout of the third-party user interface of the video conferencing application (Gupta, Fig. 7B with ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148, ¶0139, ¶0144 ¶0151-¶0152 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Bot responses based on prompts within the chat interface result in providing information directly in the current meeting. See Fig. 7B showing the Bot response. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. Dashboard link is displayed within the chat log of the video conference); and
responsive to the detection of the occurrence of the first trigger event, effectuate the first set of automated actions within the collaboration environment (Gupta, ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
However, Gupta appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Greenblatt discloses a calendar system (Greenblatt, Abstract), including
the third-party content records corresponding to third party content embedded within the collaboration environment and storing values of embedded content parameters, the embedded content parameters characterizing the third-party content embedded within the collaboration environment (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0042-¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar view layout of the third party calendar, including a view layout for inputs to the calendar as well as a view layout of the user’s other calendar events. Fig. 1 with ¶0030-¶0034 – calendar server system is separate and distinct from the client and web hosting servers. Fig. 4 with ¶0038-¶0043, ¶0078, ¶0174 – calendaring server system includes records for calendar entries including parameters such a start and end times, attendees, etc.).
update, by the server, the values of the embedded content parameters based on the layout and wherein the user interface presents the values of the embedded content parameters so that the third-party content obtained is displayed within the user interface (Greenblatt, ¶0043 – display of an editable electronic calendar entry form. Figs. 7C-7H with ¶0134-0137 – the user’s agenda near the time of the event affects the layout of the embedded calendar content. Edits or updates to the calendar invoke a corresponding update to the display of the user’s agenda).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the calendar of Gupta to include embedded calendar parameters of a third-party calendar interface based on the teachings of Greenblatt. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable more efficient calendar entry creation and compatibility with a variety of calendaring systems (Greenblatt, ¶0029-¶0039).
Regarding claim 2, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources further include a calendar application, and wherein the one or more physical processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to: obtain, by the server and from the calendar application, second information characterizing a calendar view layout of a second third-party user interface of the calendar application; and update, by the server, the values of the embedded content parameters based on the second information (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0042-¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar view layout of the third party calendar, including a view layout for inputs to the calendar as well as a view layout of the user’s other calendar events. Fig. 1 with ¶0032-¶0034 – calendar server system).
Regarding claim 4, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein an automated action is defined by a target component and an action component, the target component identifies an environment parameter to which an action is to be carried out with, and the action component defines instructions to effectuate the action with respect to the environment parameter (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task).
Regarding claim 5, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the first trigger event is defined by a source component and an event component, the source component identifies an embedded content parameter from which occurrences of the first trigger event are derived, and the event component defines a state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event (Gupta, ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152. For example, a source component can refer to a status field and the state of the parameter can refer to a state such as “closed” or “active”).
Regarding claim 6, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 5 above, and further discloses wherein the state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event includes a change of a value of the embedded content parameter, such that the first trigger event is associated with the change (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
Regarding claim 7, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 5 above, and further discloses wherein the state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event includes a specific value of the embedded content parameter, such that the first trigger event is associated with the specific value (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on change or lack of change to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
Regarding claim 8, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the automation information further specifies one or more trigger events are derived from one or more of the values of the environment parameters (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on change or lack of change to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152. For example, an environment parameter can be a user invitee/project/task correlated with a particular status).
Regarding claim 9, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources further include one or more of a payment application, a social media application, a customer relationship management application, a ticketing application, a partner relationship management application, or a web form application (Gupta, Fig. 7 with ¶0028 – social media applications such as chat, discussion, and conferencing platforms. ¶0031-¶0032, ¶0051 – management of task relationship between team-members (partners). ¶0108-¶0109 – ticket management application).
Regarding claim 10, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 9 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources includes the web form application or the payment application (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar entry form includes form fields).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the calendar of Gupta to include a web form application based on the teachings of Greenblatt. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable more efficient calendar entry creation and compatibility with a variety of calendaring systems (Greenblatt, ¶0029-¶0039).
Regarding claim 11, Gupta discloses a method to effectuate sets of automated actions within a collaboration environment based on trigger events derived from third-party content embedded in the collaboration environment, the method comprising (Gupta, ¶0083, ¶0168 – processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory. ¶0013 – video conferencing platform. ¶0051-¶0062 – issue tracking tool can track tasks triggered by interaction from users in the collaboration environment. Meeting software may be third party software):
managing, by a server, environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the collaboration environment being configured to facilitate interaction by users with the collaboration environment through a user interface of the collaboration environment (Gupta, Fig. 1 with ¶0083 – collaborative work environment. Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7A-7B, and 8 with ¶0016-¶0018, ¶0021-¶0022 – users can interact with the collaborative work environment via a user interface),
the environment state information including work unit records
the third-party resources including a video conferencing application provided by a first third-party server operating outside of the system which includes the server managing the environment state information (Gupta, Fig. 2A, 3 with ¶0091, ¶0116-¶0118, ¶0143 – third-party video conference content is embedded with the collaboration environment. Data can be retrieved for embedding via API calls to third party services. Fig. 1 with ¶0082-¶0083 - the Third Party Meeting Tool, Bridge Service, and Collaboration Tool are each instantiated over different, independent, and distinct physical hardware, including instantiation within independent server systems);
obtaining, by the server and from the video conferencing application, first information characterizing a video conferencing layout of a third-party user interface of the video conferencing application; updating, by the server, the
effectuating presentation of the user interface of the collaboration environment through which the users interact with the collaboration environment (Gupta, Fig. 1 with ¶0083 – collaborative work environment. Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7A-7B, and 8 with ¶0016-¶0018, ¶0021-¶0022 – users can interact with the collaborative work environment via a user interface);
effectuating presentation of a video conferencing view in the user interface of the collaboration environment through which the users interact with the video conferencing application (Gupta, Fig. 2A with ¶0083, ¶0090 – collaborative work environment includes a video conference application interface),
wherein the user interface presents the values of the environment parameters and the
wherein the third-party content obtained from the video conferencing application is obtained by the server by performing one or more application programming interface calls to the video conferencing application, obtaining one or more responses from the video conferencing application, and updating the values of the
detecting an occurrence of a first trigger event, wherein the first trigger event is associated with automation information that specifies a first set of automated actions to carry out within the collaboration environment in response to the first trigger event derived from the third-party content of the video conference application displayed within the user interface of the collaboration environment in the same video conferencing layout as the video conferencing layout of the third-party user interface of the video conferencing application (Gupta, Fig. 7B with ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148, ¶0139, ¶0144 ¶0151-¶0152 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Bot responses based on prompts within the chat interface result in providing information directly in the current meeting. See Fig. 7B showing the Bot response. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. Dashboard link is displayed within the chat log of the video conference);
and responsive to the detection of the occurrence of the first trigger event, effectuating the first set of automated actions within the collaboration environment (Gupta, ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
However, Gupta appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Greenblatt discloses a calendar system (Greenblatt, Abstract), including
the third-party content records corresponding to third party content embedded within the collaboration environment and storing values of embedded content parameters, the embedded content parameters characterizing the third-party content embedded within the collaboration environment (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0042-¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar view layout of the third party calendar, including a view layout for inputs to the calendar as well as a view layout of the user’s other calendar events. Fig. 1 with ¶0030-¶0034 – calendar server system is separate and distinct from the client and web hosting servers. Fig. 4 with ¶0038-¶0043, ¶0078, ¶0174 – calendaring server system includes records for calendar entries including parameters such a start and end times, attendees, etc.).
update, by the server, the values of the embedded content parameters based on the layout and wherein the user interface presents the values of the embedded content parameters so that the third-party content obtained is displayed within the user interface (Greenblatt, ¶0043 – display of an editable electronic calendar entry form. Figs. 7C-7H with ¶0134-0137 – the user’s agenda near the time of the event affects the layout of the embedded calendar content. Edits or updates to the calendar invoke a corresponding update to the display of the user’s agenda).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the calendar of Gupta to include embedded calendar parameters of a third-party calendar interface based on the teachings of Greenblatt. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable more efficient calendar entry creation and compatibility with a variety of calendaring systems (Greenblatt, ¶0029-¶0039).
Regarding claim 12, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 11 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources further include a calendar application, and wherein the method further comprises: obtaining, by the server and from the calendar application, second information characterizing a calendar view layout of a second third-party user interface of the calendar application; and updating, by the server, the values of the embedded content parameters based on the second information (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0042-¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar view layout of the third party calendar, including a view layout for inputs to the calendar as well as a view layout of the user’s other calendar events. Fig. 1 with ¶0032-¶0034 – calendar server system).
Regarding claim 14, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 11 above, and further discloses wherein an automated action is defined by a target component and an action component, the target component identifies an environment parameter to which an action is to be carried out with, and the action component defines instructions to effectuate the action with respect to the environment parameter (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task).
Regarding claim 15, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 11 above, and further discloses wherein the first trigger event is defined by a source component and an event component, the source component identifies an embedded content parameter from which occurrences of the first trigger event are derived, and the event component defines a state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event (Gupta, ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152. For example, a source component can refer to a status field and the state of the parameter can refer to a state such as “closed” or “active”).
Regarding claim 16, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 15 above, and further discloses wherein the state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event includes a change of a value of the embedded content parameter, such that the first trigger event is associated with the change (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on changes to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
Regarding claim 17, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 15 above, and further discloses wherein the state of the embedded content parameter dictating the occurrences of the first trigger event includes a specific value of the embedded content parameter, such that the first trigger event is associated with the specific value (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on change or lack of change to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152).
Regarding claim 18, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 1above, and further discloses wherein the automation information further specifies one or more trigger events are derived from one or more of the values of the environment parameters (Gupta, ¶0051-¶0062 – command, target user, and task are input to track a task. ¶0074, ¶0146-¶0148 – issue data is tracked based on changes or lack of change to the tracked data. Graphical summaries are triggered based on change or lack of change to tracked issues. See also ¶0151-¶0152. For example, an environment parameter can be a user invitee/project/task correlated with a particular status).
Regarding claim 19, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 11 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources further include one or more of a payment application, a social media application, a customer relationship management application, a ticketing application, a partner relationship management application, or a web form application (Gupta, Fig. 7 with ¶0028 – social media applications such as chat, discussion, and conferencing platforms. ¶0031-¶0032, ¶0051 – management of task relationship between team-members (partners). ¶0108-¶0109 – ticket management application).
Regarding claim 20, Gupta as modified discloses the elements of claim 19 above, and further discloses wherein the third-party resources includes the web form application or the payment application (Greenblatt, Figs. 3B, 7C-7H with ¶0034, ¶0043, ¶0076, ¶0133, ¶0163-¶0213 – web-based calendar entry form includes form fields).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the calendar of Gupta to include a web form application based on the teachings of Greenblatt. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable more efficient calendar entry creation and compatibility with a variety of calendaring systems (Greenblatt, ¶0029-¶0039).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL W PARCHER whose telephone number is (303)297-4281. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time.
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)272-4088 (Eastern Time). 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.
/DANIEL W PARCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights