Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Application
2. Claim 1-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
Drawings
3. The drawings filed on 10/16/23 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8, and 19 are 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 and when outstanding 35 U.S.C 101 abstract idea rejection is overcome.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Independent claim 1, 14:
Step 1: Yes
Claim 1 is drawn to a building system and claim 14 drawn to a method, therefore falls under one of four categories of statutory subject matter (process/method, machines/products/apparatus, manufactures, and compositions of matter).
Step 2A, Prong 1: Yes
Claim 1, and 14 recites the functions of “generate a space usage recommendation based on the information” that under their broadest reasonable interpretation, enumerates a mental concept. A human can mentally generate space usage recommendation. Thus, these claimed functions are the judicial exceptions that are no more than a mental abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2: No
Claim 1, and 14 recites additional function “ingest information comprising at least one of occupancy information or energy usage information associated with a building, cause a graphical model of the building to include a representation of the information and the space usage recommendation”, “and cause a display device of a user device to display the graphical model within a user interface” that fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of “ingest information” and ‘display the graphical model” is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, such that data gathering is necessary for the use of the judicial exception (e.g., data are needed to process the mental concept of accepting data, checking data, and extracting data). The combination of these additional functions does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 1 further recite additional limitation of "storage device", “processor”, “display device” and claim 14 recite “processor”, “display device” are considered as do not integrate into practical application and are recited at a high level of generality such that thy amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.95(f)).
The combination of these additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: No
The additional functions that are a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea because the court decisions have determined that this additional element to be well-understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner for data storing, collecting, receiving, transmitting, outputting, or displaying ( See MPEP 2106.05(d)(ll), Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016))). As such, claim 1, and 14 are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 3-8, and 16-20:
Step 1: Yes
Claims 3-8 are further drawn to a building system, and claim 16-20 are drawn to a method, therefore fall under one of four categories of statutory subject matter (process/method, machines/products/apparatus, manufactures, and compositions of matter).
Step 2A, Prong 1: Yes
Dependent claim 3-8, and 16-20 are directed to a judicially recognized exception of an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 8, and 19 recites the functions of “predict a future fault for a first area within the building based on the fault detection information for a second area within the building and at least one of the temperature information, the smoke detection information, the viral detection information, the particulate detection information, or the airflow information”,
Claim 20 recites “generating, by the one or more processors, a building redesign recommendation based on the occupancy information” that under their broadest reasonable interpretation, enumerates a mental concept. A human can mentally generate recommendation based on the information and also predict a future fault. Thus, these claimed functions are the judicial exceptions that are no more than a mental abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2: No
Claims 3-8, and 16-20 further recites insignificant extra solution activities of information includes “wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and the representation of the information is an occupancy heat map” (claim 3, 16); “wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and the graphical model is configured to represent a real-time flow of occupants into, out of, and within the building” (claim 4, and 17), “wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and the energy usage information and the representation of the information comprises a color indication of one or more spaces consuming energy that lack occupants” (claim 5, 18), “wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and further comprises one or more of fault detection information, temperature information, smoke detection information, viral detection information, particulate detection information, or airflow information” (Claim 7), “and cause the display device to display a future fault indicator within the graphical model, the future fault indicator being representative of the future fault” (Claim 8, 19), “wherein the information comprises the occupancy information, the occupancy information being collected during a post-construction phase of the building, and causing, by the one or more processors, the user interface to include the building redesign recommendation” (Claim 20).
The limitation of generating information includes, and displaying is forms of insignificant input or output solution activities (i.e., extra solution), such that data outputting are necessary for the use of the judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The combination of these additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Claim 8, and 19-20 further recite “processor", and claim 6 and 20 recite “user interface” are considered as do not integrate into practical application and are recited at a high level of generality such that thy amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.95(f)).
The combination of these additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: No
The additional functions that are a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea because the court decisions have determined that this additional element to be well-understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner for data storing, collecting, receiving, transmitting, outputting, or displaying ( See MPEP 2106.05(d)(ll), Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016))). As such, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
As such, dependent claim 3-8, and 16-20 are not patent eligible.
Claims 2, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for being dependent upon a rejected base claim 1 and 14 respectively, but appear to include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, such that if the limitation of claim 2, and 15 get combined with claim 1, and 14 respectively as a whole will provide a practical application to the judicial exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claim 1-2, 4, 7, 9-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogel (Pub: 2019/0361407) in view of Sridharan (Pub: 2017/0115642).
6. Regarding claim 1, Vogel teaches a building system comprising one or more storage devices storing instructions thereon that (e.g., Storage machine 504 includes one or more physical devices configured to hold instructions executable by the logic machine to implement the methods and processes described herein. When such methods and processes are implemented, the state of storage machine 504 may be transformed—e.g., to hold different data) (Para. [0052]), when executed by one or more processors (e.g., The logic machine may include one or more processors configured to execute software instructions. Additionally or alternatively, the logic machine may include one or more hardware or firmware logic machines configured to execute hardware or firmware instructions) (Para. [0051]), cause the one or more processors to: ingest information comprising at least one of occupancy information or energy usage information associated with a building (e.g., Computing system 200 includes a physical space monitoring machine 202 configured to receive status parameters from a plurality of physical space monitors.
Physical space monitoring machine 202 is configured to receive and maintain a plurality of status parameters 208. A “status parameter” is any piece of information that indicates current conditions within or affecting a physical space. Non-limiting examples of such status parameters include air temperature, air composition, brightness, ambient noise level, room occupancy (e.g., expressed as a binary value or an actual number of individuals), device operation status, current device locations, identities of detected devices (expressed with any suitable granularity—e.g., human-readable identifiers, model numbers, general categories), electrical power consumption, employee records (e.g., job title, attendance, current location, workspace location, daily schedule, commute length, close associates, fatigue level, emotional state), building floorplan, tenant information (e.g., the identities of any entities using or leasing parts of a building), building schedules (e.g., opening/closing hours, times the building is normally occupied, times at which specific rooms are reserved—e.g., for meetings), etc. Furthermore, status parameters can include information not strictly related to conditions within the physical space, and yet have a bearing on how the physical space is used. For example, status parameters may include traffic data, weather data, calendar information, etc) (Para. [0021]-[0022]);
generate a space usage recommendation based on the information (e.g., In addition to usage efficiency metrics, efficiency analysis machine 204 is also configured to generate at least one physical space efficiency insight. A “physical space efficiency insight” includes a recommendation that is actionable to improve a usage efficiency of the physical space, specifically by changing a physical space usage policy affecting one or more locations, devices, or people associated with the physical space. For example, an efficiency insight focused on reducing electrical power consumption of a physical space may recommend altering behavior of a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system of the physical space. HVAC systems are frequently inefficient and wasteful, in some cases even running both heating and air conditioning at the same time, and optimization of the HVAC system can result in substantial energy savings. In some cases, such optimization may be done on the basis of occupancy. This may include, for example, scaling back or ceasing any climate control operations in unoccupied rooms/spaces, altering HVAC operation based on current occupancy (e.g., turning on air conditioning for crowded rooms), etc.) (Para. [0037], also refer to Para. [0038]);
cause a graphical [model] of the building to include a representation of the information and the space usage recommendation (e.g., Computing system 200 also includes an analytics interface 206 configured to graphically display the usage efficiency metric 214 and the physical space efficiency insight 216. As discussed above, the physical space efficiency insight includes a recommendation 218 to change a usage policy affecting one or more locations, devices, or people to improve the usage efficiency metric (e.g., reduce power consumption in the physical space)) (Para. [0041]);
and cause a display device of a user device to display the graphical [model] within a user interface (e.g., Computing system 200 also includes an analytics interface 206 configured to graphically display the usage efficiency metric 214 and the physical space efficiency insight 216. As discussed above, the physical space efficiency insight includes a recommendation 218 to change a usage policy affecting one or more locations, devices, or people to improve the usage efficiency metric (e.g., reduce power consumption in the physical space)) (Para. [0041]).
Vogel teaches the graphical display of recommendation but does not specifically teach the graphical model.
Sridharan teaches the graphical model (e.g., In some embodiments, a BIM is a 3D graphical model of the building. A BIM may be created using computer modeling software or other computer-aided design (CAD) tools and may be used by any of a plurality of entities that provide building-related services) (Para. [0031]).
Because Sridharan is also directed to a building automation system (BAS), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Vogel and Sridharan before him/her, to modify the teachings of Vogel to include the graphical model of building teaching of Sridharan in order to control, monitor, and/or manage equipment in or around a building or building area (Sridharan: Para. [0003]).
7. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1, wherein Vogel further teaches the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to: alter a space usage schedule based on the space usage recommendation, wherein the space usage schedule is altered one of automatically or in response to a user input via the user interface (e.g., In some examples, the efficiency analysis machine may automatically implement the changes recommended in an efficiency insight once the insight is generated. In other examples, the efficiency insight may only be implemented in response to user input, for example provided to the analytics interface. The efficiency analysis machine may, for example, notify a user that changes will automatically be applied at a certain time unless the user specifically requests otherwise. Furthermore, the manner in which changes are implemented may vary from case to case—for example the efficiency analysis machine may implement minor changes automatically, though request user authorization for larger or more disruptive changes) (Para. [0045]).
8. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1, wherein Vogel further teaches the information comprises the occupancy information and the graphical model is configured to represent a real-time flow of occupants into, out of, and within the building (e.g., The physical space monitoring machine may store or maintain the status parameters in any suitable way. In some cases, the status parameters may be useable to construct a “digital twin” or simulation of the physical space. For example, the status parameters may be used to construct a graph or chart that monitors conditions within the physical space in real time. Furthermore, a digital twin of a physical space may be used to make predictions as to how the physical space will be affected by hypothetical conditions. For example, based on trends learned over time, a digital twin may be used to predict how use of the physical space will change if more or fewer individuals work on a given floor, if the weather gets hotter or colder, if the building floorplan changes, etc.) (Para. [0026]).
9. Regarding claim 7, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1, wherein Vogel further teaches building system of claim 1, wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and further comprises one or more of fault detection information, temperature information, smoke detection information, viral detection information, particulate detection information, or airflow information (e.g., Physical space monitoring machine 202 is configured to receive and maintain a plurality of status parameters 208. A “status parameter” is any piece of information that indicates current conditions within or affecting a physical space. Non-limiting examples of such status parameters include air temperature, air composition, brightness, ambient noise level, room occupancy (e.g., expressed as a binary value or an actual number of individuals), device operation status, current device locations, identities of detected devices (expressed with any suitable granularity—e.g., human-readable identifiers, model numbers, general categories), electrical power consumption, employee records (e.g., job title, attendance, current location, workspace location, daily schedule, commute length, close associates, fatigue level, emotional state), building floorplan, tenant information (e.g., the identities of any entities using or leasing parts of a building), building schedules (e.g., opening/closing hours, times the building is normally occupied, times at which specific rooms are reserved—e.g., for meetings), etc. Furthermore, status parameters can include information not strictly related to conditions within the physical space, and yet have a bearing on how the physical space is used. For example, status parameters may include traffic data, weather data, calendar information, etc.) (Para. [0022]).
10. Regarding claim 9, Claim 9 recites a building system that implement the building system of claim 1, with substantially the same limitations, respectively. Therefore the rejection applied to claim 1, also applies to claim 9 respectively.
Wherein Vogel further teaches receive a request via the user interface to perform an action associated with the building recommendation (e.g., In other examples, the efficiency insight may only be implemented in response to user input, for example provided to the analytics interface) (Para. [0045]);
and transmit a command to perform the action to a device associated with the building recommendation (e.g., and automatically instruct one or more remote devices or people to alter their behavior in accordance with the changed physical space usage policy. In this example or any other example, the usage efficiency metric indicates an amount of electrical power used by devices in the physical space, and the recommendation to change the physical space usage policy includes altering behavior of a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system of the physical space based on occupancy of the physical space) (Para. [0063]).
11. Regarding claim 10, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 9, wherein Vogel further teaches the information further includes environmental information comprising at least one of temperature information, humidity information, or particulate information (e.g., Physical space monitor 106A may additionally or alternatively measure air composition—relative levels of oxygen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, humidity, ozone, etc.—which also relates to the comfort level of physical space 100) (Para. [0013]).
12. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 10, wherein Vogel further teaches the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to: determine a recommended action based on the environmental information (e.g., Specifically, a physical space monitoring machine receives status parameters from a plurality of physical space monitors, based on which an efficiency analysis machine determines usage efficiency metrics and efficiency insights for the physical space. Such insights can in some examples be based on external data sources—e.g., weather data, traffic data, or calendar information. For example, the efficiency analysis machine may report a total amount of electrical power consumed by devices in the physical space, and suggest ways in which this power consumption may be reduced. The usage efficiency metrics and physical space efficiency insights are presented in an analytics interface from which physical space performance can be reviewed and managed. Furthermore, the computing system can construct a “digital twin” of the physical space usable, for example, to simulate or predict how the space will be used under different conditions (e.g., with a new proposed floorplan or variable weather conditions)) (Para. [0008]);
and cause the graphical model to include an indication of the recommended action (e.g., The efficiency insights generated by an efficiency analysis machine may be implemented in any suitable way. In some examples, the efficiency analysis machine may be configured to implement the changed physical space usage policy recommended by the efficiency insight. For example, the efficiency analysis machine may send notifications or instructions to one or more human workers (e.g., managers, technicians) to update schedules, reconfigure devices, renovate locations, etc. Additionally, or alternatively, the efficiency analysis machine may be configured to implement one or more changes on its own, for example by directly modifying behavior of any devices in its network) (Para. [0044]).
13. Regarding claim 12, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 10, wherein Vogel further teaches wherein the information comprises the occupancy information, the occupancy information being collected during a post-construction phase of the building (e.g., Physical space monitor 106B is a camera (e.g., visible light camera, infrared camera). Camera 106B may, for instance, record whether a location within the physical space is occupied, how many people are in the location, identities of any people within the location, a reason why the location is occupied (e.g., for a meeting) (occupancy information includes how many people with reason why the location is occupied is a information collected during post-construction phase of the building) (Para. [0014]),
and wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to: generate a building redesign recommendation based on the occupancy information (e.g., As additional nonlimiting examples, the efficiency analysis machine may generate an efficiency insight that recommends changing a floorplan of the physical space (e.g., to address space utilization concerns), moving designated workspaces for one or more identified people (e.g., to reduce a commute time, move people to be closer to their team or frequent collaborators, move people to more comfortable or productive environments), changing daily schedules of one or more service technicians (e.g., based on expertise or daily efficiency), etc) (Para. [0039]);
and cause the user interface to include the building redesign recommendation (e.g., Computing system 200 also includes an analytics interface 206 configured to graphically display the usage efficiency metric 214 and the physical space efficiency insight 216. As discussed above, the physical space efficiency insight includes a recommendation 218 to change a usage policy affecting one or more locations, devices, or people to improve the usage efficiency metric (e.g., reduce power consumption in the physical space).) (Para. [0041]).
14. Regarding claim 13, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 9, wherein Vogel further teaches the information further comprises indoor air quality (IAQ) information, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the one or more processors to calculate an occupancy within the building based on the occupancy information, and wherein the building recommendation is generated based on the calculated occupancy and the IAQ information (e.g., It will be understood that the above usage efficiency metrics are provided as nonlimiting examples. In general, an efficiency analysis machine may generate any number and variety of different usage efficiency metrics. Such metrics may be based on any status parameters, including any of the nonlimiting status parameters discussed above. In other words, usage efficiency metrics may be generated that describe average air temperature in the physical space, air quality, meeting length, employee emotional sentiment, etc. Furthermore, any or all of the efficiency metrics may be manually defined in addition to or as an alternative to being calculated or derived computationally) (Para. [0036], also refer to Para. [0021]-[0022]).
15. Regarding claim 14, Claim 14 recites a method that implement the building system of claim 1, with substantially the same limitations, respectively. Therefore the rejection applied to claim 1, also applies to claim 14 respectively.
16. Regarding claim 15, as to claim 15, applicant is directed to citation of claim 2 above.
17. Regarding claim 17, as to claim 17, applicant is directed to citation of claim 4 above.
18. Regarding claim 20, as to claim 20, applicant is directed to citation of claim 12 above.
19. Claim 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogel in view of Sridharan, and further in view of Thind (Pub: 2010/0235004).
20. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1 but does not specifically teach wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and the representation of the information is an occupancy heat map.
Thind teaches wherein the information comprises the occupancy information and the representation of the information is an occupancy heat map (e.g., FIG. 10 exemplarily illustrates a GUI 209 displaying heat maps and occupancy maps of one or more occupancy zones 401 in an occupancy space. The GUI 209 displays controlled environmental conditions by overlaying temperature heat maps and occupancy maps on a floor plan of the occupancy space. The heat maps display temperatures of the occupancy zones 401 by mapping the temperatures using a coordinate system) (Para. [0009]).
Because Thind is also directed to controlling environmental conditions of multiple occupancy zones in an occupancy space, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Vogel, Sridharan and Thind before him/her, to modify the combined teachings of Vogel and Sridharan to include the teaching of Thind in order to control environmental conditions of multiple occupancy zones in an occupancy space (Thind: Para. [0007]).
21. Regarding claim 16, as to claim 16, applicant is directed to citation of claim 3 above.
22. Claim 5-6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogel in view of Sridharan, and further in view of Papadopoulos (Pub: 2017/0242411).
23. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1 wherein Vogel further teaches the information comprises the occupancy information (e.g., Physical space monitor 106B is a camera (e.g., visible light camera, infrared camera). Camera 106B may, for instance, record whether a location within the physical space is occupied, how many people are in the location, identities of any people within the location, a reason why the location is occupied (e.g., for a meeting), an illumination level of the location (e.g., via natural or artificial light), the on/off status of any devices within the physical space (e.g., whether a television is on), etc) (Para. [0014]) and the energy usage information (e.g., Physical space monitor 106E is an electricity meter configured to measure electrical power consumption by devices within location 102. In some examples, physical space monitor 106E may be integrated into the electrical infrastructure of physical space 100, or physical space monitor 106E may be a separate sensor/meter installed by a user. Regardless, the electricity meter measures electrical power consumption of any or all devices within location 102 (i.e., devices 106A-106D, 108A, and 108B), and reports such information to a physical space monitoring machine of a computing system. In some examples, power consumption for each device may be reported separately (for example, when each device is on a separate circuit), and/or power consumption may be reported for the entire location as a whole) (Para. [0017]).
Papadopoulos teaches and the representation of the information comprises a color indication of one or more spaces consuming energy that lack occupants (e.g., The background colors of graphs 802 and 804 may be used to indicate supporting information. For example, as illustrated by shading and lack of shading, occupancy information may be included graph 802. In some embodiments, occupancy of a room is important to troubleshooting, and may be indicated by different colors and a value, or text, in the background. For example, graph 802 shows text indications 812 of whether Room 105 was occupied or unoccupied. Indications of associated system information (e.g., AHU supply fan status) may also be shown using background colors, text colors, shading, or other visual indicia to allow a user to easily obtain such information without reading the text. For example, a user can simply look at the colors and shading to determine the status of various items.) (Para. [0121]).
Because Thind is also directed to graphical user interfaces for managing building systems, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Vogel, Sridharan and Papadopoulos before him/her, to modify the combined teachings of Vogel and Sridharan to include the teaching of Papadopoulos in order to provide graphical user interface that is intuitive, easy to use, and overcomes the disadvantages of conventional BMS interfaces (Para. [0003]).
24. Regarding claim 6, the combination of Vogel and Sridharan teaches the building system of claim 1, wherein Vogel further teaches the user interface is configured to allow a user to control one or more devices within the one or more spaces consuming energy (e.g., For example, the efficiency analysis machine may send notifications or instructions to one or more human workers (e.g., managers, technicians) to update schedules, reconfigure devices, renovate locations, etc. ) (Para. [0044]) that lack occupants to reduce an energy consumption associated with the one or more devices (e.g., Accordingly, the efficiency analysis machine may output an efficiency insight including a recommendation to reduce heating of the physical space, but only when the physical space is unoccupied) (Para. [0040])
25. Regarding claim 18, as to claim 18, applicant is directed to citation of claim 5 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-0698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Kenneth M. Lo can be reached at (571)272-9774. 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.
/JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116