DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 7/7/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-10, and 12-21 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that:
Thus, in Yoon, the user's operation is not performed for the purpose of resizing the region; rather, the resizing occurs as an incidental byproduct of the system's adaptive response to content-oriented commands. The user never directly provides an operation acting on the content image or chat image for resizing; the system decides how to resize.
Moreover, even when Yoon's controller resizes the images, the adjustment is pre- determined and simultaneous, not sequential or result-based (see Yoon Pars. [0063] and [0064]). There is no dynamic computation where the controller first determines the adjusted size of the content image and then derives the chat image's size from that resulting size. The two regions are adjusted in unison to pre-defined sizes, not in a sequence where one region's adjustment dictates the other's.
The Examiner cannot concur with the Applicant. Regarding the first point, Yoon’s content size adjustment has the effect of changing the size of the region. In general, users that are aware of the effect of an input at a GUI interface can perform the input to achieve the effect. Regarding the second point, the user does directly perform an operation on the image for resizing. The system may decide how to resize based on receiving the input (this is true in a case where the user drags a window handle as well). Yoon discloses that when the user performs an input on the content region, for example, the content region is resized (Yoon, ¶0017, ¶0066). This is a direct performance of an input to the region, and the input triggers a resizing operation, which the user can be aware of ahead of time.
Regarding the third point above, the claims do not require that the resizing of the images is sequential, and such a limitation would not appear to be supported by Applicant’s Specification. The claim language “adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region” does not require that the display of the first region at the adjusted size has occurred prior to determining the size of the second region. In Yoon, the size of the first region is determined to be enlarged (Yoon, at least ¶0066), and within screen size constraint (Yoon, ¶0054) and overlap constraints (Yoon, ¶0067), the second window is reduced to accommodate the increased size. Yoon explicitly states this behavior at least at ¶0066.
[0066] The controller 160 enlarges the size of the content image 210 upon receiving a user's input to the content image 210, and enlarges the size of the chat image 220 upon receiving a user's input to the chat image 220. The controller 160 reduces the size of the chat image 220 in response to the enlargement of the content image 210, and reduces the size of the content image 210 in response to the enlargement of the chat image 220. (emphasis added)
Accordingly, Yoon discloses that the adjustment of the size of the second region is “based on” the adjustment of the size of the first region.
Prior Art
Listed herein below are the prior art references relied upon in this Office Action:
Hill et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0297400), referred to as Hill herein [previously cited].
Chen et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2023/0073128), referred to as Chen herein [previously cited].
Casey et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2009/0063645), referred to as Casey herein [previously cited].
Curry et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2015/0040009), referred to as Curry herein [previously cited].
Yoon et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2013/0311942), referred to as Yoon herein [previously cited on 8/12/2025].
Examiner’s Note
Strikethrough notation in the pending claims has been added by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10, and 12-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hill in view of Chen in further view of Yoon.
Regarding claim 1, Hill discloses a landscape screen interaction method, comprising (Hill, Figs. 6-7 – video display is in landscape orientation. ¶0023, ¶0033 – orientation of the device is determined):
receiving a first trigger operation acting on an interaction control of a video playing region of a first video in a landscape display page (Hill, Fig. 7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch from full screen to splitscreen mode with resized video display);
in response to the first trigger operation, resizing the video playing region to a first display region of the landscape display page, wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to splitscreen mode with resized video display);
i
However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses a landscape video display mode (Chen, Abstract with ¶0043), including
wherein the first associated information comprises comment information corresponding to the first video, the comment information comprising a plurality of comments that have been published (Chen, Fig. 3 with ¶0043, ¶0048 and ¶0091-¶0093 – users can send and view comments synchronized with the video source in the landscape display mode).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the additional information presentation of Hill to include synchronized comments based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user interaction and engagement with the video and other users watching the video (Chen, ¶0091-¶0093).
However, Hill as modified appears not to expressly disclose in response to an adjustment operation for adjusting a seize of the first display region, adjusting a size of the first display region, and adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region. However, in the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses a split screen display including display of images and video (Yoon, Abstract with ¶0033-¶0038), including
in response to a size adjustment operation acting on the first display region for adjusting a size of the first display region, adjusting the size of the first display region, and adjusting the size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region (Yoon, Figs. 2-4 with ¶0050-¶0055, ¶0066-¶0085 – User input to the content image results in enlargement of content image size and reduction of the chat image size. User input to the chat image results in enlargement of the chat image size and reduction of the content image size. The images are sized based on the size of the screen and with the constraint that the regions do not overlap. ¶0042 – touch input).
wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other (Yoon, Abstract and ¶0053).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the split-screen presentation of Hill as modified to include adjusting the sizes of the regions based on the teachings of Yoon. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable the user to more easily view the content in one of the split screen regions (Yoon, ¶0059-¶0060).
Regarding claim 2, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses receiving a second trigger operation for switching the first video; and in response to the second trigger operation, switching the first video in the video playing region to a second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the suggested videos of Hill to include selection for viewing based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduced the time and energy needed to access the desired video (Chen, ¶0003, ¶0032-¶0033).
Regarding claim 3, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses switching the first associated information in the second display region to second associated information corresponding to the second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 4, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses wherein receiving the second trigger operation for switching the first video comprises at least one of the following operations:
receiving a slide switching operation acting on a video playing picture of the first video (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation);
receiving a switching operation acting on a preset video switching control in the video playing region (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation); and
in a case where the first associated information includes at least one recommended video, receiving a selection operation acting on the recommended video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 5, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses receiving a third trigger operation for stopping displaying the first associated information; and in response to the third trigger operation, stopping displaying the first associated information, and scaling up the video playing region for displaying (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0024, ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the PiP or splitscreen mode to be switched to the full screen video display).
Regarding claim 6, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 5 above, and further discloses wherein scaling up the video playing region for displaying comprises: scaling up the video playing region to a third display region for displaying, wherein the third display region is determined according to the first display region and the second display region (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0024, ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the PiP or splitscreen mode to be switched to the full screen video display. Applicant’s Specification at ¶0112-¶0113 describes “wherein the target display region is determined according to the first display region and the second display region” as including full-screen presentation or the entire landscape display page).
Regarding claim 10, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the second display region is located in a region outside the first display region in the landscape display page (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to PiP or splitscreen mode with resized video display).
Regarding claim 12, Hill discloses an electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and a storage apparatus, configured to store at least one program; when executed by the at least one processor, the at least one program causing the at least one processor to implement a landscape screen interaction method comprising the following operations (Hill, Figs. 6-7 – video display is in landscape orientation. ¶0023, ¶0033 – orientation of the device is determined. ¶0021-¶0022 – processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory):
receiving a first trigger operation acting on an interaction control of a video playing region of a first video in a landscape display page (Hill, Fig. 7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch from full screen to splitscreen mode with resized video display);
in response to the first trigger operation, resizing the video playing region to a first display region of the landscape display page (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to splitscreen mode with resized video display), and
presenting first associated information corresponding to the first video in a second display region of the landscape display page, wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other ((Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to splitscreen mode with resized video display. ¶0025, ¶0031, ¶0033 – suggestions presented based partly on the metadata of the currently playing movie); and
However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses a landscape video display mode (Chen, Abstract with ¶0043), including
wherein the first associated information comprises comment information corresponding to the first video, the comment information comprising a plurality of comments that have been published (Chen, Fig. 3 with ¶0043, ¶0048 and ¶0091-¶0093 – users can send and view comments synchronized with the video source in the landscape display mode).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the additional information presentation of Hill to include synchronized comments based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user interaction and engagement with the video and other users watching the video (Chen, ¶0091-¶0093).
However, Hill as modified appears not to expressly disclose in response to an adjustment operation for adjusting a seize of the first display region, adjusting a size of the first display region, and adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region. However, in the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses a split screen display including display of images and video (Yoon, Abstract with ¶0033-¶0038), including
in response to a size adjustment operation acting on the first display region for adjusting a size of the first display region, adjusting the size of the first display region, and adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region (Yoon, Figs. 2-4 with ¶0050-¶0055, ¶0066-¶0085 – User input to the content image results in enlargement of content image size and reduction of the chat image size. User input to the chat image results in enlargement of the chat image size and reduction of the content image size. The images are sized based on the size of the screen and with the constraint that the regions do not overlap. ¶0042 – touch input).
wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other (Yoon, Abstract and ¶0053).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the split-screen presentation of Hill as modified to include adjusting the sizes of the regions based on the teachings of Yoon. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable the user to more easily view the content in one of the split screen regions (Yoon, ¶0059-¶0060).
Regarding claim 13, Hill discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the program, when executed by a processor, implementing a landscape screen interaction method comprising the following operations (Hill, Figs. 6-7 – video display is in landscape orientation. ¶0023, ¶0033 – orientation of the device is determined. ¶0021-¶0022 – processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory):
receiving a first trigger operation acting on an interaction control of a video playing region of a first video in a landscape display page (Hill, Fig. 7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch from full screen to splitscreen mode with resized video display);
in response to the first trigger operation, resizing the video playing region to a first display region of the landscape display page (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to splitscreen mode with resized video display), and
presenting first associated information corresponding to the first video in a second display region of the landscape display page, wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other ((Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0023, ¶0028 and ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the landscape video display to switch to splitscreen mode with resized video display. ¶0025, ¶0031, ¶0033 – suggestions presented based partly on the metadata of the currently playing movie); and
However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses a landscape video display mode (Chen, Abstract with ¶0043), including
wherein the first associated information comprises comment information corresponding to the first video, the comment information comprising a plurality of comments that have been published (Chen, Fig. 3 with ¶0043, ¶0048 and ¶0091-¶0093 – users can send and view comments synchronized with the video source in the landscape display mode).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the additional information presentation of Hill to include synchronized comments based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user interaction and engagement with the video and other users watching the video (Chen, ¶0091-¶0093).
However, Hill as modified appears not to expressly disclose in response to an adjustment operation for adjusting a seize of the first display region, adjusting a size of the first display region, and adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region. However, in the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses a split screen display including display of images and video (Yoon, Abstract with ¶0033-¶0038), including
in response to a size adjustment operation acting on the first display region for adjusting a size of the first display region, adjusting the size of the first display region, and adjusting a size of the second display region based on the adjusted size of the first display region (Yoon, Figs. 2-4 with ¶0050-¶0055, ¶0066-¶0085 – User input to the content image results in enlargement of content image size and reduction of the chat image size. User input to the chat image results in enlargement of the chat image size and reduction of the content image size. The images are sized based on the size of the screen and with the constraint that the regions do not overlap. ¶0042 – touch input).
wherein the first display region and the second display region do not obstruct each other (Yoon, Abstract and ¶0053).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the split-screen presentation of Hill as modified to include adjusting the sizes of the regions based on the teachings of Yoon. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable the user to more easily view the content in one of the split screen regions (Yoon, ¶0059-¶0060).
Regarding claim 14, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 12 above, and further discloses the landscape screen interaction method further comprising: receiving a second trigger operation for switching the first video; and in response to the second trigger operation, switching the first video in the video playing region to a second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the suggested videos of Hill as modified to include selection for viewing based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduced the time and energy needed to access the desired video (Chen, ¶0003, ¶0032-¶0033).
Regarding claim 15, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 14 above, and further discloses the landscape screen interaction method further comprising: switching the first associated information in the second display region to second associated information corresponding to the second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 16, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 14 above, and further discloses wherein receiving the second trigger operation for switching the first video comprises at least one of the following operations: receiving a slide switching operation acting on a video playing picture of the first video (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation);
receiving a switching operation acting on a preset video switching control in the video playing region (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation); and
in a case where the first associated information includes at least one recommended video, receiving a selection operation acting on the recommended video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 17, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 12 above, and further discloses receiving a third trigger operation for stopping displaying the first associated information; and in response to the third trigger operation, stopping displaying the first associated information, and scaling up the video playing region for displaying (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0024, ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the PiP or splitscreen mode to be switched to the full screen video display).
Regarding claim 18, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 13 above, and further discloses receiving a second trigger operation for switching the first video; and in response to the second trigger operation, switching the first video in the video playing region to a second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the suggested videos of Hill to include selection for viewing based on the teachings of Chen. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduced the time and energy needed to access the desired video (Chen, ¶0003, ¶0032-¶0033).
Regarding claim 19, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 18 above, and further discloses switching the first associated information in the second display region to second associated information corresponding to the second video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 20, Hill as modified discloses the elements of claim 18 above, and further discloses wherein receiving the second trigger operation for switching the first video comprises at least one of the following operations:
receiving a slide switching operation acting on a video playing picture of the first video (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation);
receiving a switching operation acting on a preset video switching control in the video playing region (Hill, ¶0025 – pinch gesture. Chen, Fig. 9 with ¶0084 – sliding expansion operation); and
in a case where the first associated information includes at least one recommended video, receiving a selection operation acting on the recommended video (Chen, Fig. 7 with ¶0084-¶0086 – video recommendation list is shown in landscape display mode. Recommendations are relevant to the initial video. An operation on the recommended list switches the target video to the selected video. Recommended list is updated in response to the new video selected).
Regarding claim 21, Hill discloses the elements of claim 13 above, and further discloses the landscape screen interaction method further comprising: receiving a third trigger operation for stopping displaying the first associated information; and in response to the third trigger operation, stopping displaying the first associated information, and scaling up the video playing region for displaying (Hill, Figs. 6-7 with ¶0024, ¶0043-¶0044 – trigger can include gestures input at the display to cause the PiP or splitscreen mode to be switched to the full screen video display).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hill in view of Chen in further view of Yoon in further view of Casey.
Regarding claim 7, Hill discloses the elements of claim 1 above. However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose wherein the interaction control comprises a comment identifier in the landscape display page; and wherein the presenting first associated information corresponding to the first video in a second display region of the landscape display page comprises: presenting first comment information corresponding to the first video in the second display region of the landscape display page.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Casey discloses a video interface, including a chat portion (Casey, Abstract), including
wherein the target interaction control comprises a comment identifier in the landscape display page; and wherein the presenting first associated information corresponding to the first video in a second display region of the landscape display page comprises: presenting first comment information corresponding to the first video in the second display region of the landscape display page (Casey, Figs. 3e and 3f with ¶0050 – selection at the expand icon of the comment identifier results in expanding the chat session interface and resizing the video interface).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the web content region of Hill to include a trigger for displaying comments based on the teachings of Casey. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve interaction between video program users, by simplifying the process and devices required (Casey, ¶0007-¶0008, ¶0010).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hill in view of Chen in further view of Yoon in further view of Curry.
Regarding claim 8, Hill discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the interaction control comprises
However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Curry discloses resizing a video player (Curry, Abstract), including
the target interaction control comprises a publisher identifier of the first video in the landscape display page; and wherein the presenting first associated information corresponding to the first video in a second display region of the landscape display page comprises: presenting video information published by a publisher corresponding to the first video in the second display region of the landscape display page (Curry, Fig. 6A-7B with ¶0029, ¶0075-¶0077 – resized video interface includes selection of publisher (channel) page, including videos presented by the same publisher. Figs. 5A-5B – links for related movies during full size playback include “suggested videos” and “more from channel”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the interface of Hill to include an interface for selecting suggestion categories including a publisher channel based on the teachings of Curry. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable users to focus suggestions to a channel which they’re interested in (Curry, ¶0029).
Regarding claim 9, Hill discloses the elements of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the second display region
However, Hill appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above. However, in the same field of endeavor, Curry discloses resizing a video player (Curry, Abstract), including
a home page jump identifier (Curry, Fig. 6A-7B with ¶0029, ¶0075-¶0077 – resized video interface includes selection of publisher (channel) page, including videos presented by the same publisher. Figs. 5A-5B – links for related movies during full size playback include “suggested videos” and “more from channel”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the interface of Hill to include an interface for selecting suggestion categories including a publisher page based on the teachings of Curry. The motivation for doing so would have been to enable users to focus suggestions to a channel which they’re interested in (Curry, ¶0029).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL W PARCHER whose telephone number is (303)297-4281. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Bashore can be reached at (571)272-4088 (Eastern Time). The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL W PARCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights