DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
In an amendment filed 2026-01-21 (“Remarks”), applicant amended claims 1-3 and cancelled claim 8. Thus, claims 1-7 and 9-14 remain under consideration.
Drawings
Corrected drawings have been received. The objections to the drawings are withdrawn.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 8 has been canceled. The prior 35 U.S.C. 112(f) discussion regarding claim 8 is therefore moot.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7 and 9-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2021/0368043 to de la Garza Villarreal et al. (“de la Garza Villarreal”) in view of 3GPP TS 26.114 v17.1.0 (“3GPP”).
As to claim 1, de la Garza Villarreal discloses a method for reporting a malicious call (Fig. 4 and ¶0036), comprising, receiving data information sent by the call peer (Fig. 4, step 410; ¶0037); automatically generating a report message in response to a detected report instruction from a user; wherein the report message carries at least part of the data information; and sending the report message to a designated report acceptance center (Fig. 4, steps 420-425; ¶¶0040-42: the method includes "transmitting the phone number and the set of cellular information to the authority, the service provider, or both, when the user selects the second input region" (¶0041), thus the message: is automatically generated (i.e., the user does not have to manually generate the message); includes at least part of the data information; and is sent to a designated report acceptance center (i.e., the authority, the service provider, or both))
de la Garza Villarreal does not disclose: establishing a data channel based on Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer message in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) signaling sent by a call peer.
However, 3GPP discloses: establishing a data channel based on Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer message in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) signaling sent by a call peer (Clause 6.2.10 and Table A.17.6).
de la Garza Villarreal and 3GPP are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal to incorporate the teachings of 3GPP to include: establishing a data channel based on Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer message in a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) signaling sent by a call peer. Doing so would allow for "exploit[ing] the richer capabilities of IMS. In particular, multiple media components can be used and dynamically added or dropped during a session" (3GPP, p.16). Additionally, it would be obvious to combine the teachings of de la Garza Villarreal and 3GPP as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 2, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the detected report instruction from the user comprises, a detected preset operation by the user on a preset control on a first preset interface (de la Garza Villarreal, Fig. 4, step 425; ¶¶0040-41), and wherein the data channel is established in one of three ways comprising: hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP), a low latency mode, and a low-loss mode (3GPP, Clause 6.2.10 and Table A.17.6).
As to claim 3, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the first preset interface comprises, a call interface, or a call recording interface (de la Garza Villarreal, Fig. 4, step 425; ¶¶0040-41); and each of the three ways are indicated by a "dcmap" field in the SDP offer message (3GPP, Clause 6.2.10 and Table A.17.6).
Claims 4-6, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/0294478 to Trivi et al. (“Trivi”).
As to claim 4, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 2.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: further comprising, jumping to a second preset interface in response to the detected preset operation by the user on the preset control on the first preset interface; wherein, the second preset interface comprises data information sent by the call peer.
However, Trivi discloses: further comprising, jumping to a second preset interface in response to the detected preset operation by the user on the preset control on the first preset interface; wherein, the second preset interface comprises data information sent by the call peer (Fig. 2, element 210, and Fig. 4; ¶0059: when the user selects the "Report as Spam" interface element 210, the phone jumps to a subsequent preset interface (Fig. 4), which includes the phone number and other data information of the call peer).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and Trivi are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of Trivi to include: further comprising, jumping to a second preset interface in response to the detected preset operation by the user on the preset control on the first preset interface; wherein, the second preset interface comprises data information sent by the call peer. Doing so would "realize one or more of the following advantages. A user of a telephone may be able to avoid answering telephone calls that have been flagged by other telephone users as spam, saving time and mobile telephone minutes. A user may have a choice of options for interacting with a telephone call that is received as spam. The user may play a pre-recorded message or block the call permanently. Playing the message may provide the calling user or device information on why the call was terminated. Thus, if the call was flagged as spam in error, the calling user may be able to correct the mistake…The user-defined topics may also be used to tailor spam classifications to a particular called user, so that the called user is less likely to receive spam calls that he does not want to, but may receive calls that some other users classified as spam but that the called user does not consider spam" (Trivi, ¶¶0016-17).
As to claim 5, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and further in view of Trivi discloses the method as claimed in claim 4, wherein automatically generating the report message comprises, automatically generating the report message carrying selected data information, in response to a selection by the user for the data information comprised in the second preset interface (Trivi, Fig. 4 and ¶¶0063-71).
As to claim 6, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 2.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: wherein after the preset operation of the user on the preset control on the first preset interface is detected, the method further comprises, jumping to a third preset interface that comprises information on a type of the malicious call; and the generated report message further carries selected information of the type of the malicious call.
However, Trivi discloses: wherein after the preset operation of the user on the preset control on the first preset interface is detected, the method further comprises, jumping to a third preset interface that comprises information on a type of the malicious call (Fig. 2, element 210, and Fig. 4; ¶0059: when the user selects the "Report as Spam" interface element 210, the phone jumps to a subsequent preset interface, which includes information on a type of the malicious call (Fig. 4, elements 406-420, and ¶¶0067-70)); and the generated report message further carries selected information of the type of the malicious call (Fig. 4 and ¶71).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and Trivi are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of Trivi to include: wherein after the preset operation of the user on the preset control on the first preset interface is detected, the method further comprises, jumping to a third preset interface that comprises information on a type of the malicious call; and the generated report message further carries selected information of the type of the malicious call. Doing so would "realize one or more of the following advantages. A user of a telephone may be able to avoid answering telephone calls that have been flagged by other telephone users as spam, saving time and mobile telephone minutes. A user may have a choice of options for interacting with a telephone call that is received as spam. The user may play a pre-recorded message or block the call permanently. Playing the message may provide the calling user or device information on why the call was terminated. Thus, if the call was flagged as spam in error, the calling user may be able to correct the mistake…The user-defined topics may also be used to tailor spam classifications to a particular called user, so that the called user is less likely to receive spam calls that he does not want to, but may receive calls that some other users classified as spam but that the called user does not consider spam" (Trivi, ¶¶0016-17).
As to claim 9, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses an electronic device (Fig. 3 and ¶0032), comprising, at least one processor; and…an instruction executable by the at least one processor, which when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to carry out the method as claimed in claim 1 (¶0051).
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: a memory in communication with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores the instructions.
However, Trivi discloses: a memory in communication with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores the instructions (Fig. 12, processor 1252, memory 1264; ¶¶0142-146 and ¶0151).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and Trivi are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of Trivi to include: a memory in communication with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores the instructions. Doing so would "realize one or more of the following advantages. A user of a telephone may be able to avoid answering telephone calls that have been flagged by other telephone users as spam, saving time and mobile telephone minutes. A user may have a choice of options for interacting with a telephone call that is received as spam. The user may play a pre-recorded message or block the call permanently. Playing the message may provide the calling user or device information on why the call was terminated. Thus, if the call was flagged as spam in error, the calling user may be able to correct the mistake…The user-defined topics may also be used to tailor spam classifications to a particular called user, so that the called user is less likely to receive spam calls that he does not want to, but may receive calls that some other users classified as spam but that the called user does not consider spam" (Trivi, ¶¶0016-17).
As to claim 10, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses at least one computer program which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to carry out the method as claimed in claim 1 (¶0051).
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing the at least one computer program.
However, Trivi discloses: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing the at least one computer program (Fig. 12, processor 1252, memory 1264; ¶¶0142-146 and ¶0151).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and Trivi are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of Trivi to include: a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing the at least one computer program. Doing so would "realize one or more of the following advantages. A user of a telephone may be able to avoid answering telephone calls that have been flagged by other telephone users as spam, saving time and mobile telephone minutes. A user may have a choice of options for interacting with a telephone call that is received as spam. The user may play a pre-recorded message or block the call permanently. Playing the message may provide the calling user or device information on why the call was terminated. Thus, if the call was flagged as spam in error, the calling user may be able to correct the mistake…The user-defined topics may also be used to tailor spam classifications to a particular called user, so that the called user is less likely to receive spam calls that he does not want to, but may receive calls that some other users classified as spam but that the called user does not consider spam" (Trivi, ¶¶0016-17).
Claims 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,630,886 to White et al. (“White”).
As to claim 7, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 1.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user.
However, White discloses: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user (Col. 3: lines 32-46).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and White are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of White to include: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user. Doing so would provide "a trouble ticket system that can provide customers some interaction with the system" (White, Col. 1: lines 41-43), which would reduce "frustrat[ion] to customers that do not have any other means of determining whether the problem is in the process of being resolved, and may feel as though the problem is being overlooked by the service provider" (White, Col. 1: lines 30-34).
As to claim 11, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP discloses the method as claimed in claim 3.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP does not disclose: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user.
However, White discloses: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user (Col. 3: lines 32-46).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, and White are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP to incorporate the teachings of White to include: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user. Doing so would provide "a trouble ticket system that can provide customers some interaction with the system" (White, Col. 1: lines 41-43), which would reduce "frustrat[ion] to customers that do not have any other means of determining whether the problem is in the process of being resolved, and may feel as though the problem is being overlooked by the service provider" (White, Col. 1: lines 30-34).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi and further in view of White.
As to claim 12, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi discloses the method as claimed in claim 4.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi does not disclose: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user.
However, White discloses: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user (Col. 3: lines 32-46).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, Trivi, and White are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi to incorporate the teachings of White to include: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user. Doing so would provide "a trouble ticket system that can provide customers some interaction with the system" (White, Col. 1: lines 41-43), which would reduce "frustrat[ion] to customers that do not have any other means of determining whether the problem is in the process of being resolved, and may feel as though the problem is being overlooked by the service provider" (White, Col. 1: lines 30-34).
As to claim 13, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi discloses the method as claimed in claim 5.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi does not disclose: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user.
However, White discloses: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user (Col. 3: lines 32-46).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, Trivi, and White are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi to incorporate the teachings of White to include: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user. Doing so would provide "a trouble ticket system that can provide customers some interaction with the system" (White, Col. 1: lines 41-43), which would reduce "frustrat[ion] to customers that do not have any other means of determining whether the problem is in the process of being resolved, and may feel as though the problem is being overlooked by the service provider" (White, Col. 1: lines 30-34).
As to claim 14, de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi discloses the method as claimed in claim 6.
de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi does not disclose: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user.
However, White discloses: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user (Col. 3: lines 32-46).
de la Garza Villarreal, 3GPP, Trivi, and White are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: arrangements for screening incoming calls; network arrangements, protocols or services for supporting real-time applications in data packet communication, e.g. session management; systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers (specially adapted for wireless communication networks; and/or information and communication technology, systems, or methods specially adapted for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial or supervisory purposes. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified de la Garza Villarreal in view of 3GPP and Trivi to incorporate the teachings of White to include: wherein after sending the report message to the designated report acceptance center, the method further comprises, checking processing progress of the report message in the report acceptance center in real time according to an instruction from the user. Doing so would provide "a trouble ticket system that can provide customers some interaction with the system" (White, Col. 1: lines 41-43), which would reduce "frustrat[ion] to customers that do not have any other means of determining whether the problem is in the process of being resolved, and may feel as though the problem is being overlooked by the service provider" (White, Col. 1: lines 30-34).
References Cited
3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS); Multimedia Telephony; Media handling and interaction (Release 17)," 3GPP TS 26.114 v17.1.0, June 2021. 471 pages.
De la Garza Villarreal, Elsie et al. (2021). Managing spoofed calls to mobile devices (US 2021/0368043 A1). Filed 2020-05-21.
White, Chris L. et al. (2014). Method and system for providing enhanced trouble ticket status content (US 8,630,886 B2). Filed 2011-10-05.
Trivi, Jean-Michel et al. (2011). Telephone caller classification (US 2011/0294478 A1). Filed 2010-05-26.
Other Pertinent References
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Cefaratti, Jr., Michael Domenic et al. (2022). Systems and methods for service status tracker with service request parameter modification capability (US 2022/0217529 A1). Filed 2021-01-04.
Gupta, Shekhar (2010). Do not call list enforcement system and method (US 2010/0246794 A1). Filed 2009-03-31.
Isgar, Charles (2019). Telephone call-back device (US 10,511,715 B1). Filed 2019-03-04.
Jiron, Julio et al. (2019). Customer self-help control system for contact centers (US 10,313,511 B1). Filed 2018-06-05.
Lu, Shi et al. (2022). Detection of spoofed calls using call header (US 2022/0124195 A1). Filed 2020-08-25.
Lu, Zhenyu et al. (2012). Tracking the processing of electronic document data by network services using trace (US 2012/0050772 A1). Filed 2010-08-31.
Mahaffey, Kevin Patrick et al. (2016). Methods and systems for sharing risk responses between collections of mobile communications devices (US 2016/0099963 A1). Filed 2015-12-17.
Mcrae, Matthew Blake et al. (2007). Method and system device for deterring spam over internet protocol telephony and spam instant messaging (US 2007/0039040 A1). Filed 2005-08-12.
Mukundan, Anil et al. (2008). Method, apparatus, and system for managing status of requests in a client server environment (US 7,461,119 B2). Filed 2001-09-29.
Murtagh, John et al. (2015). Method for user reporting of spam mobile messages and filter node (US 2015/0281153 A1). Filed 2013-10-11.
Nagaoka, Hiroaki (2003). Remote operation system, and an electronic apparatus to be controlled by a remote operation apparatus (US 2003/0143993 A1). Filed 2003-01-03.
Ranta, Tarja- Leena (2003). Tracing of a malicious call (US 2003/0148754 A1). Filed 2003-01-13.
Sharpe, Benjamin (2014). Methods and systems for inbound call control (US 2014/0105373 A1). Filed 2013-09-26.
Sial, Muhammad Ejaz et al. (2020). Device logic enhancement for network-based robocall blocking (US 2020/0336588 A1). Filed 2019-04-19.
Simpson, Shell S. et al. (2003). Web-based imaging service providing reservation (US 2003/0084151 A1). Filed 2001-10-30.
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 SAMUEL H LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)272-5720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 7am – 4pm (PT).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may 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, Yuwen (Kevin) Pan can be reached at (571)272-7855. 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.
/SAMUEL H. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 2649 /YUWEN PAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649