DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 11/24/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1-65 are pending in this Office Action.
Claims 1-3, 9-11, 17-19, 21-22, 25-27, 29-30, 33-35, 37-38, 41-43, 45-46, 49-51, and 57-59 are amended.
Claim 65 is new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 9, 17, 25, 33, 41, 49, and 57 have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. The reasons set forth below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-18, 20, 22-23, 25-26, 28, 30-34, 36, 38-39, 41-42, 44, 46-50, 52, 54-55, 57-58, 60, and 62-64 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,264,326 in view of Morrill et al. (US 2012/0321052).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-18, 20, 22-23, 25-26, 28, 30-34, 36, 38-39, 41-42, 44, 46-50, 52, 54-55, 57-58, 60, and 62-64 are an obvious variation of the patented claims 16-18 for the reasons set forth below.
U.S. Patent No. 10,264,326 teaches:
U.S. Application #18/462,119
U.S. Patent No. 10,264,326 B2
1. A method comprising:
optimizing, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and using a first type of optimization technique, the network for delivery of media content to an end device;
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and optimizing, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied, before ending the first type of optimization technique and using a second type of optimization technique different from the first type, the network for delivery of media content to the end device.
16. An apparatus comprising: …
receive a first indication of whether a first quantity of data, transmitted by a device … via a first network … satisfies a first threshold value; based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered … using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; …
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and disengaging, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, the second type of optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. … determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
9. A method comprising:
sending, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and to an end device, a first portion of a content item, wherein the first portion is optimized using a first optimization technique;
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
sending, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied and to the end device, a second portion of the content item, wherein the second portion is optimized using the first optimization technique and using a second optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique.
16. An apparatus comprising: …
based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered to the device, from a data source and via a second network, using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; ...
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and sending, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied and to the end device, a second content item optimized using the first optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
12. The method of claim 9, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. … determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
14. The method of claim 9, wherein the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
15. The method of claim 9, wherein the first optimization technique comprises one of and the second optimization technique comprises a different one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein …using the first optimized delivery technique by causing the apparatus to send one of: a request for engagement of a compression engine configured to compress the content; or a request for delivery of at least one file previously stored in a compressed format.
16. The method of claim 9, wherein the second optimization technique comprises optimizing the network for sending the second portion of the content item.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique …
17. An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
optimize, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and using a first type of optimization technique, the network for delivery of media content to an end device;
determine, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
optimize, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied, before ending the first type of optimization technique and using a second type of optimization technique different from the first type, the network for delivery of media content to the end device.
16. An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: …
receive a first indication of whether a first quantity of data, transmitted by a device … via a first network … satisfies a first threshold value; based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered … using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; …
18. The apparatus of claim 17, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to: determine, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and disengage, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, the second type of optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
20. The apparatus of claim 17, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. … determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
22. The apparatus of claim 17, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to determine that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied by: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
25. An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
send, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and to an end device, a first portion of a content item, wherein the first portion is optimized using a first optimization technique;
determine, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and send, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied and to the end device, a second portion of the content item, wherein the second portion is optimized using the first optimization technique and using a second optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique.
16. An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: …
based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered to the device, from a data source and via a second network, using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; ...
26. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to: determine, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and send, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied and to the end device, a second content item optimized using the first optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
28. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. … determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
30. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to determine that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied by: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
31. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the first optimization technique comprises one of and the second optimization technique comprises a different one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein …using the first optimized delivery technique by causing the apparatus to send one of: a request for engagement of a compression engine configured to compress the content; or a request for delivery of at least one file previously stored in a compressed format.
32. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the second optimization technique comprises optimizing the network for sending the second portion of the content item.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique …
33. One or more non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, cause:
optimizing, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and using a first type of optimization technique, the network for delivery of media content to an end device;
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
optimizing, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied, before ending the first type of optimization technique and using a second type of optimization technique different from the first type, the network for delivery of media content to the end device.
16. An apparatus comprising: …
receive a first indication of whether a first quantity of data, transmitted by a device … via a first network … satisfies a first threshold value; based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered … using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; …
34. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 33, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and
disengaging, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, the second type of optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
36. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 33, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16.
… determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
38. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 33, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied by causing: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
41. One or more non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, cause:
sending, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and to an end device, a first portion of a content item, wherein the first portion is optimized using a first optimization technique;
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
sending, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied and to the end device, a second portion of the content item, wherein the second portion is optimized using the first optimization technique and using a second optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique.
16. An apparatus comprising: …
based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered to the device, from a data source and via a second network, using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; ...
42. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 41, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and sending, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied and to the end device, a second content item optimized using the first optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
44. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 41, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. …
determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
46. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 41, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied by causing: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
47. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 41, wherein the first optimization technique comprises one of and the second optimization technique comprises a different one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein …
using the first optimized delivery technique by causing the apparatus to send one of: a request for engagement of a compression engine configured to compress the content; or a request for delivery of at least one file previously stored in a compressed format.
48. The one or more non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 41, wherein the second optimization technique comprises optimizing the network for sending the second portion of the content item.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique …
49. A system comprising: a computing device; and an end device, wherein the computing device comprises:
one or more first processors; and first memory storing first instructions that, when executed by the one or more first processors, cause the computing device to:
optimize, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and using a first type of optimization technique, the network for delivery of media content to the end device;
determine, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
optimize, before ending the first type of optimization technique and using a second type of optimization technique different from the first type, the network for delivery of media content to the end device, and
wherein the end device comprises: one or more second processors; and second memory storing second instructions that, when executed by the one or more second processors, cause the end device to: receive, via the optimized network, the media content.
16. An apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed
by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
receive a first indication of whether a first quantity of data, transmitted by a device … via a first network … satisfies a first threshold value; based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered to the device … using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; …
the content to be delivered to the device …
50. The system of claim 49, wherein the first instructions, when executed by the one or more first processors, further cause the computing device to:
determine, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and
disengage, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, the second type of optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
52. The system of claim 49, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. … determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
54. The system of claim 49, wherein the first instructions, when executed by the one or more first processors, cause the computing device to determine that the second bandwidth utilization threshold has been satisfied by causing the computing device to: determine that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
57. A system comprising: a first computing device; and an end device, wherein the first computing device comprises: one or more first processors; and first memory storing first instructions that, when executed by the one or more first processors, cause the first computing device to:
send, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and to the end device, a first portion of a content item, wherein the first portion is optimized using a first optimization technique;
determine, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied; and
send, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied and to the end device, a second portion of the content item, wherein the second portion is optimized using a second optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique, and
wherein the end device comprises: one or more second processors; and second memory storing second instructions that, when executed by the one or more second processors, cause the end device to: receive, from the first computing device, the optimized second portion of the content item.
16. An apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and memory
storing instructions that, when executed
by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:…
based on determining that the first threshold value is satisfied: cause at least a portion of content to be delivered to the device, from a data source and via a second network, using a first optimized delivery technique;
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; and based on determining that the second threshold value is satisfied for the third time period: cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique; ...
the content to be delivered to the device …
58. The system of claim 57, wherein the first instructions, when executed by the one or more first processors, further cause the first computing device to:
determine, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and send, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied and to the end device, a second content item optimized using the first optimization technique.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, …
receive a third indication of whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value; … based on determining that the second threshold value is not satisfied for the third time period: cause at least the second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using the first optimized delivery technique.
60. The system of claim 57, wherein the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold.
16. …
determining that the first threshold value is satisfied …
18. … determining that the second threshold value is satisfied …
62. The system of claim 57, wherein the first instructions, when executed by the one or more first processors, cause the first computing device to determine that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied by causing the first computing device to: determine that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time.
18. …
whether a third quantity of data, transmitted by the device via the first network during a third time period, satisfies a second threshold value …
63. The system of claim 57, wherein the first optimization technique and the second optimization technique each comprises one or more of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein …
using the first optimized delivery technique by causing the apparatus to send one of: a request for engagement of a compression engine configured to compress the content; or a request for delivery of at least one file previously stored in a compressed format.
64. The system of claim 57, wherein the second optimization technique comprises optimizing the network for sending the second portion of the content item.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein … cause at least a second additional portion of the content to be delivered to the device, from the data source and via the second network, using a second optimized delivery technique …
Claims 16-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,264,326 do not explicitly disclose: the first type of optimization technique is used on the network; the second type of optimization technique is used on the network before ending the first type of optimization technique; and the first type of optimization technique comprises one of and the second type of optimization technique comprises a different one of: utilizing additional network devices for delivery of media content to the end device, adjusting a portion of a communication pathway used for delivery of media content to the end device, or altering a level of bandwidth available to one or more additional devices associated with the network. However, claims 16-18 do disclose transmitting data via a first network, the first optimization technique is used on a second network, and the second optimization technique is used on the second network. Further Morrill discloses different optimization techniques, such as displaying locations where additional routers, gateways, or other network communications devices may be desired for higher bandwidth capacity. Based on a bandwidth threshold, the performance data manager may seek to re-route content communications. Direct one or more network nodes to change the bandwidth of a CODEC, close ports (par. 268). A person of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that the claimed invention would have been an obvious variation of the patented claims because optimizing the first network instead of the second network would have provided the benefit of avoiding the need for transmitting via a second network and to improve network performance, alleviate congestion, and increase bandwidth capacity (Morrill – par. 268).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-10, 12, 14, 16-18, 20, 22-26, 28, 30, 32-34, 36, 38-42, 44, 46, 48-50, 52, 54-58, 60, 62, and 64-65 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Boland (US 7,873,074) in view of Kotecha et al. (US 2013/0132559).
Regarding claims 1, 17, 33, and 49, Boland teaches: A method, an apparatus, one or more non-transitory computer readable medium, and a system comprising:
optimizing, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and using a first type of optimization technique, the network for delivery of media content to an end device [Based on a lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, a first type of optimization to allow the customer to feel that they are receiving their money's worth is used, including determining to increase bandwidth utilization, such as by selecting a higher quality codec for the streaming media to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7)]
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied [Based on historic bandwidth usage and projected bandwidth usage during a time period, determining that an upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 is met (col. 12, line 64 through col. 13, line 13, col. 13, line 26 through col. 14, line 19, and col. 15, lines 35-67, Fig. 3-5 and 7)] and
optimizing, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied, using a second optimization technique different from the first type, the network for delivery of media content to the end device [A second type of optimization technique to mitigate or eliminate excessive costs associated with going over a bandwidth threshold is used, including decreasing the streaming media bandwidth utilization, such as by requesting use of a codec that requires less bandwidth or using a header compression scheme (col. 14, lines 20-39 and col. 16, lines 31-47, Fig. 1, 3-5 and 7)].
Boland does not explicitly disclose: the optimizing using a second type of optimization technique is before ending the first type of optimization technique.
Kotecha teaches optimizing using a second type of optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique [identify bandwidth utilization and determine whether an amount of bandwidth and/or a data rate associated with the flow is greater than an amount of bandwidth and/or a data rate identified by the application policy. When it is greater than the threshold, transmit a notification to control the flow by decreasing the amount of bandwidth and/or the data rate to a level that is less than an amount identified by the application policy. Additionally, or alternatively, the flow may be processed by decreasing a level of QoS or using a lower forwarding priority (par. 47-50, Fig. 5)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland and Kotecha before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland by incorporating the teaching of Kotecha for optimizing using a second type of optimization technique before ending the first type of optimization technique. For example, by continuing to use the higher quality codec of Boland, but apply one of the techniques of Kotecha as well. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce the resources used by the network and avoid network congestion, while providing a particular quality of service to the user (Kotecha – par. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 2, 18, 34, and 50, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland and Kotecha further teach: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied and disengaging, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, the second type of optimization technique [Boland - The usage monitor 120 continues monitoring the streaming media bandwidth utilization and/or data transfer utilization either on a continuous basis or on a periodic basis (e.g., every minute, hour, day, etc.) (Fig. 4). When the bandwidth utilization for a period indicates it will be below the lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, determining to increase bandwidth utilization (col. 3, lines 44-55, col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7). Kotecha – Based on the traffic load conditions (bandwidth), the server may transmit an instruction to increase the traffic flow (par. 23-24)].
Regarding claims 4, 20, 36, and 52, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland further teaches: the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold [The upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 is higher than the lower threshold 408 (Fig. 4)].
Regarding claims 6, 22, 38, and 54, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland and Kotecha further teach: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time [Boland - Determining the total bandwidth utilization curve 304 during a time period meets or exceeds an upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 (col. 12, line 64 through col. 13, line 13, col. 13, line 26 through col. 14, line 19, and col. 15, lines 35-67, Fig. 3-5 and 7). Kotecha - bandwidth utilization, and/or a quantity of throughput (e.g., a quantity of data within a time period) (par. 47)].
Regarding claims 7, 23, 39, and 55, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland further teaches: the first type of optimization technique comprises one of: utilizing additional network devices for delivery of media content to the end device, adjusting a portion of a communication pathway used for delivery of media content to the end device, or altering a level of bandwidth available to one or more additional devices associated with the network [adjusting a portion of a communication pathway used for delivery of media content to the end device, such as increasing or decreasing bandwidth utilization by sending a message to the communication devices 108 and/or switch 132 requesting use of a higher bandwidth consumption codec (col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, lines 20-39, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, lines 31-47, col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 3-6, and 7)].
Kotecha further teaches: the second type of optimization technique comprises a different one of: utilizing additional network devices for delivery of media content to the end device, adjusting a portion of a communication pathway used for delivery of media content to the end device, or altering a level of bandwidth available to one or more additional devices associated with the network [utilizing additional network devices for delivery of media content to the end device, such as by transferring the flows to another base station 120 (par. 74, Fig. 1)].
Regarding claims 8, 24, 40, and 56, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland and Kotecha further teach: the second type of optimization technique comprises optimizing the media content for delivery to the end device [Boland - Optimizing the streaming media for delivery to the user, by reducing the bandwidth utilization, such as using a lower quality codec, such that the user will not have to pay extra costs (col. 13, lines 41-45, col. 14, lines 20-39 and col. 16, lines 31-47, Fig. 1, 3-5 and 7). Kotecha – optimizing such as by decreasing the amount of bandwidth and/or the data rate to a level that is less than an amount identified by the application policy. Additionally, or alternatively, the flow may be processed by decreasing a level of QoS or using a lower forwarding priority (par. 47-50, Fig. 5)].
Regarding claims 9, 25, 41, and 57, Boland teaches: A method comprising:
sending, based on a first bandwidth utilization threshold of a network and to an end device, a first portion of a content item, wherein the first portion is optimized using a first optimization technique [The streaming media is broken up into portions carried in packets (col. 3, lines 38-42 and col. 10, line 65 through col. 11, line 1, Fig. 2). Based on a lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, determining to increase bandwidth utilization, such as by selecting a higher quality codec for the streaming media packets to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7)]
determining, based on a first quantity of data transmitted during a first time period, that a second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied [Based on historic bandwidth usage and projected bandwidth usage during a time period, determining that an upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 is met (col. 12, line 64 through col. 13, line 13, col. 13, line 26 through col. 14, line 19, and col. 15, lines 35-67, Fig. 3-5 and 7)] and
sending, based on the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied and to the end device, a second portion of the content item, wherein the second portion is optimized using a second optimization technique [Decreasing the streaming media bandwidth utilization on a per packet basis, such as by requesting use of a codec that requires less bandwidth or using a header compression scheme for the streaming media to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 14, lines 20-39 and col. 16, lines 31-47, Fig. 1, 3-5 and 7)].
Boland does not explicitly disclose: the optimizing of the second portion using the first optimization technique and using the second optimization technique before ending the first optimization technique.
Kotecha teaches optimizing the second portion using the first optimization technique and using the second optimization technique before ending the first optimization technique [identify bandwidth utilization of packets of content, such as a movie, and determine whether an amount of bandwidth and/or a data rate associated with the flow is greater than an amount of bandwidth and/or a data rate identified by the application policy. When it is greater than the threshold, transmit a notification to control the flow by decreasing the amount of bandwidth and/or the data rate for the flow of content packets to a level that is less than an amount identified by the application policy. Additionally, or alternatively, the flow may be processed by decreasing a level of QoS or using a lower forwarding priority (par. 47-50, Fig. 5)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland and Kotecha before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland by incorporating the teaching of Kotecha for optimizing the second portion using the first optimization technique and using the second optimization technique before ending the first optimization technique. For example, by continuing to use the higher quality codec of Boland, but apply one of the techniques of Kotecha as well. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce the resources used by the network and avoid network congestion, while providing a particular quality of service to the user (Kotecha – par. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 10, 26, 42, and 58, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland and Kotecha further teach: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied; and sending, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied and to the end device, a second content item optimized using the first optimization technique [Boland - The usage monitor 120 continues monitoring the streaming media bandwidth utilization and/or data transfer utilization either on a continuous basis or on a periodic basis (e.g., every minute, hour, day, etc.) (Fig. 4). When the bandwidth utilization for a period indicates it will be below the lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, determining to increase bandwidth utilization, such as by selecting a higher quality codec for another streaming media to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 3, lines 44-55, col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7). Kotecha – Based on the traffic load conditions (bandwidth), the server may transmit an instruction to increase the traffic flow (par. 23-24)].
Regarding claims 12, 28, 44, and 60, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland further teaches: the second bandwidth utilization threshold exceeds the first bandwidth utilization threshold [The upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 is higher than the lower threshold 408 (Fig. 4)].
Regarding claims 14, 30, 46, and 62, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland further teaches: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that a bandwidth utilization level of the network meets or exceeds the second bandwidth utilization threshold for a period of time [Determining the total bandwidth utilization curve 304 during a time period meets or exceeds an upper bandwidth utilization threshold 404 (col. 12, line 64 through col. 13, line 13, col. 13, line 26 through col. 14, line 19, and col. 15, lines 35-67, Fig. 3-5 and 7)].
Regarding claims 16, 32, 48, and 64, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland and Kotecha further teach: the second optimization technique comprises optimizing the network for sending the second portion of the content item [Boland - Optimizing the network for delivery of the streaming media to the user, by reducing the bandwidth utilization, such as using a lower quality codec, such that the user will not have to pay extra costs (col. 13, lines 41-45, col. 14, lines 20-39 and col. 16, lines 31-47, Fig. 1, 3-5 and 7). Kotecha – optimizing such as by decreasing the amount of bandwidth and/or the data rate for the packets to a level that is less than an amount identified by the application policy. Additionally, or alternatively, the flow may be processed by decreasing a level of QoS or using a lower forwarding priority (par. 47-50, Fig. 5)].
Regarding claim 65, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland further teaches: the first type of optimization technique comprises adjusting a parameter of a communication pathway of the network [adjusting a parameter of a communication pathway of the network, such as increasing or decreasing bandwidth utilization by sending a message to the communication devices 108 and/or switch 132 requesting use of a higher bandwidth consumption codec (col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, lines 20-39, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, lines 31-47, col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 3-6, and 7)].
Claims 3, 5, 11, 13, 19, 21, 27, 29, 35, 37, 43, 45, 51, 53, 59, and 61 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Boland (US 7,873,074) in view of Kotecha et al. (US 2013/0132559), and further in view of Saleem et al. (US 2007/0053428).
Regarding claims 3, 19, 35, and 51, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland further teaches: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied [The usage monitor 120 continues monitoring the streaming media bandwidth utilization and/or data transfer utilization either on a continuous basis or on a periodic basis (e.g., every minute, hour, day, etc.) (Fig. 4). When the bandwidth utilization for a period indicates it will be below the lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, determining to increase bandwidth utilization, such as by selecting a higher quality codec for the streaming media to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 3, lines 44-55, col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7)].
Boland and Kotecha do not explicitly disclose: reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second type of optimization technique.
Saleem teaches: reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second type of optimization technique [when there is sufficient available bandwidth to support providing more data, the compression level may be decreased to increase the bandwidth used (par. 22, Fig. 2)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland, Kotecha, and Saleem before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland and Kotecha by incorporating the teaching of Saleem for reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second type of optimization technique. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a variable amount of compression to reduce the compression level in order to provide a higher quality representation of the data stream (Saleem – par. 20 and 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha with Saleem to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 5, 21, 37, and 53, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 1; Boland and Kotecha do not explicitly disclose: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more content items would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network.
Saleem teaches: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more content items would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network [determining whether the available bandwidth is acceptable for transmitting the video stream over the network by considering whether a maximum allowed delay time would be exceeded and reducing the bandwidth used for transmitting the video data (par. 16-17, 20, 22, and 26, Fig. 1-4)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland, Kotecha, and Saleem before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland and Kotecha by incorporating the teaching of Saleem such that the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more content items would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network. The motivation for doing so would have been to continually provide the highest quality video possible while maintaining a high degree of confidence that the video can be successfully transmitted within the available bandwidth (Saleem – par. 46). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha with Saleem to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 11, 27, 43, and 59, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland further teaches: determining, based on a second quantity of data transmitted during a second time period, that a reduced bandwidth utilization level of the network has been satisfied [The usage monitor 120 continues monitoring the streaming media bandwidth utilization and/or data transfer utilization either on a continuous basis or on a periodic basis (e.g., every minute, hour, day, etc.) (Fig. 4). When the bandwidth utilization for a period indicates it will be below the lower bandwidth utilization threshold 408, determining to increase bandwidth utilization, such as by selecting a higher quality codec for the streaming media to be delivered over the network 104 (col. 3, lines 44-55, col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 4, 6, and 7)].
Boland and Kotecha do not explicitly disclose: reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second optimization technique.
Saleem teaches: reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second optimization technique [when there is sufficient available bandwidth to support providing more data, the compression level may be decreased to increase the bandwidth used (par. 22, Fig. 2)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland, Kotecha, and Saleem before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland and Kotecha by incorporating the teaching of Saleem for reducing, based on the reduced bandwidth utilization level being satisfied, an intensity level of the second optimization technique. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a variable amount of compression to reduce the compression level in order to provide a higher quality representation of the data stream (Saleem – par. 20 and 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha with Saleem to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 13, 29, 45, and 61, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland and Kotecha do not explicitly disclose: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more additional portions of the content item would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network.
Saleem teaches: the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more additional portions of the content item would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network [determining whether the available bandwidth is acceptable for transmitting the video stream over the network by considering whether a maximum allowed delay time would be exceeded and reducing the bandwidth used for transmitting the video data (par. 16-17, 20, 22, and 26, Fig. 1-4)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland, Kotecha, and Saleem before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland and Kotecha by incorporating the teaching of Saleem such that the determining that the second bandwidth utilization threshold of the network has been satisfied comprises: determining that sending one or more content additional portions of the content item would cause a slowdown in content delivery via the network. The motivation for doing so would have been to continually provide the highest quality video possible while maintaining a high degree of confidence that the video can be successfully transmitted within the available bandwidth (Saleem – par. 46). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha with Saleem to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 15, 31, 47, and 63 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Boland (US 7,873,074) in view of Kotecha et al. (US 2013/0132559), and further in view of Wei (US 2014/0082192).
Regarding claims 15, 31, 47, and 63, Boland and Kotecha teach the method of claim 9; Boland further teaches: the first optimization technique comprises one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters [Compressing portions of the media content, such as by selecting a higher or lower quality codec, which compress the streaming media to be delivered over the network 104, or using a header compression scheme (col. 2, lines 5-24, col. 13, lines 14-25, col. 14, lines 20-39, col. 14, line 53 through col. 15, line 16, and col. 16, lines 31-47, col. 16, line 58 through col. 17, line 30, Fig. 1, 3-6, and 7)].
Boland and Kotecha do not explicitly disclose: the second optimization technique comprises a different one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters.
Wei teaches: the second optimization technique comprises a different one of: adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item, engaging a compression protocol configured to compress portions of the content item, or selecting, for sending portions of the content item, a file preconfigured with adjustable parameters [adjusting the bitrate for sending content segments based on bandwidth condition (par. 110-114 and 192)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Boland, Kotecha, and Wei before him at the time the invention was made to modify the method of Boland and Kotecha by incorporating the teaching of Wei such that either the first or second optimization technique comprises adjusting a bit-rate for sending portions of the content item. The motivation for doing so would have been to regulate the bandwidth condition of the network and reduce network congestion (Wei – par. 65). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Boland and Kotecha with Wei to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Boyd whose telephone number is (571)270-0676. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm PST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/ALEXANDER BOYD/Examiner, Art Unit 2424
/BENJAMIN R BRUCKART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2424