Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment submitted on December 15, 2025.
Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 15, 18-19, 21-31 are pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 29, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, and accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-2, 5, 8-9, 12, 15-16 and 19 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Shrestha et al. US Publication No. No. 2022/0353133 in view of Navendu et al. CHINA Patent No. CN 106165345.
The amendments to claims 1, 8, and 15 have overcome the rejection. Therefore, the prior rejection has been withdrawn, and new grounds of rejection are made in this Office action. The new grounds of rejection are necessitated by Applicant's amendment, and accordingly, this Office action is made Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 21-24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the out-of-band communications network.”
Regarding claim 24, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the monitoring devices.” Claim 28 is rejected for the same reason as claim 24.
Regarding claim 24, the claim recites, “wherein one or more of the computing equipment, the monitoring devices, and the local communication device are configured to transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power.” It is not clear which element, if any, is “to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power.” It is not clear whether the claim is broadly claiming a step of transmitting a dying event or referring to particular element(s), e.g., computing equipment, monitoring devices, and local communication device, that is to transmit the dying event. Claim 28 is rejected for the same reason as claim 24.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 12, 15, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shrestha et al. US Publication No. No. 2022/0353133 (“Shrestha”) in view of Navendu et al. Chinese Patent No. CN 106165345 (“Navendu”) and Thomson US Patent Publication No. 2011/0007636 (“Thomson”).
Regarding claim 1, Shrestha teaches a computer-implemented method for providing on-site alerts of critical errors in a data center environment (para. [0066] "several of the alerts may have an initial priority classification of "critical."), the method comprising:
detecting an error by a monitoring device of a computing equipment in the data center
environment (para. [0010],[0082] "data center alerts occurring at particular points in time." para. [0011],[0092] "screen presentation of a UI implemented to present data center alert detail corresponding to a graphical depiction of a data center asset");
transmitting, by the monitoring device, an alert corresponding to the error to a local communication device (para. [0031] "UI engine 124 may be implemented to generate a UI for the provision, or receipt, or certain information associated with the monitoring, or management, or a particular data center asset 244").
Shrestha does not teach wherein determining, by the local communication device, a severity of the error based on a set of alert preferences; and based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over an communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by the computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within the data center environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert.
Navendu teaches wherein determining, by a local communication device, a severity of an error based on a set of alert preferences (p. 4. 'the error marker elements 402 can be assigned to alarm 400 "high", 'middle" or a "low' to represent severity of a network alarm"); based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device (p. 4. "according to one example, such a value may be placed in equipment failure history table and/or link fault history table"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Thus, given the teaching of Navendu, it 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 to have combined the teaching of Navendu into Shrestha for a method and system of representing severity of a network alert. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to identify the alert level of the data center.
Thomson discloses transmitting an alert to a notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over a communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by a computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within an environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert (para. [0011] broadcast fault report messages that may be received by other nodes of the wireless mesh network and forwarded to a controller or network management server. para. [0015] mesh access points in the mesh network… generally include one radio, operating in a first frequency band, and associated wireless communication functionality to communicate with other mesh access points to thereby implement the wireless backbone. para. [0027] mesh access point module collects fault data (404) and then logs the fault data. if the mesh access point module applies OOB management, the mesh access point module passes the fault data to the RFID tag 330). It 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 to have modified the system of Shrestha and Navendu with Thomson’s disclosure of transmitting alerts via RF broadcast over a network separate from a primary communications network within an environment such that the alerts are transmitted via RF broadcast within the data center of Shrestha. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial to provide a separate mode of communication, out-of-band, for reporting of faults (para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 8, Shrestha teaches a computing system having a memory having computer readable instructions and one or more processor for executing the computer readable instructions, the computer readable instructions controlling the one or more processors (i.e., "system comprising: a processor; a data bus coupled to the processor; and a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium", see [0004]) to perform operations comprising:
detecting an error by a monitoring device of a computing equipment in a data center environment
(para. [0010],[0082] "data center alerts occurring at particular points in time." para. [0011],[0092] "screen presentation of a UI implemented to present data center alert detail corresponding to a graphical depiction of a data center asset");
transmitting, by the monitoring device, an alert corresponding to the error to a local communication device (para. [0031] "UI engine 124 may be implemented to generate a UI for the provision, or receipt, or certain information associated with the monitoring, or management, or a particular data center asset 244").
Shrestha does not teach wherein determining, by the local communication device, a severity of the error based on a set of alert preferences; and based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over an communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by the computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within the data center environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert.
Navendu teaches wherein determining, by a local communication device, a severity of an error based on a set of alert preferences (p. 4. 'the error marker elements 402 can be assigned to alarm 400 "high", 'middle" or a "low' to represent severity of a network alarm"); based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device (p. 4. "according to one example, such a value may be placed in equipment failure history table and/or link fault history table"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Thus, given the teaching of Navendu, it 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 to have combined the teaching of Navendu into Shrestha for a method and system of representing severity of a network alert. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to identify the alert level of the data center.
Thomson discloses transmitting an alert to a notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over a communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by a computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within an environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert (para. [0011] broadcast fault report messages that may be received by other nodes of the wireless mesh network and forwarded to a controller or network management server. para. [0015] mesh access points in the mesh network… generally include one radio, operating in a first frequency band, and associated wireless communication functionality to communicate with other mesh access points to thereby implement the wireless backbone. para. [0027] mesh access point module collects fault data (404) and then logs the fault data. if the mesh access point module applies OOB management, the mesh access point module passes the fault data to the RFID tag 330). It 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 to have modified the system of Shrestha and Navendu with Thomson’s disclosure of transmitting alerts via RF broadcast over a network separate from a primary communications network within an environment such that the alerts are transmitted via RF broadcast within the data center of Shrestha. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial to provide an separate mode of communication, out-of-band, for reporting of faults (para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 15, Shrestha teaches a computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to cause the processor (i.e., "system comprising: a processor; a data bus coupled to the processor; and a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium", see [0004]) to perform operations comprising:
detecting an error by a monitoring device of a computing equipment in the data center environment (para. [0010],[0082] "data center alerts occurring at particular points in time." para. [0011],[0092] "screen presentation of a UI implemented to present data center alert detail corresponding to a graphical depiction of a data center asset");
transmitting, by the monitoring device, an alert corresponding to the error to a local communication device (para. [0031] "UI engine 124 may be implemented to generate a UI for the provision, or receipt, or certain information associated with the monitoring, or management, or a particular data center asset 244"]).
Shrestha does not teach wherein determining, by the local communication device, a severity of the error based on a set of alert preferences; and based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over an communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by the computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within the data center environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert.
Navendu teaches wherein determining, by a local communication device, a severity of an error based on a set of alert preferences (p. 4. 'the error marker elements 402 can be assigned to alarm 400 "high", 'middle" or a "low' to represent severity of a network alarm"); based on a determination that the severity of the error is critical, transmitting, by the local communication device, the alert to an on-premises alert notification device (p. 4. "according to one example, such a value may be placed in equipment failure history table and/or link fault history table"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Thus, given the teaching of Navendu, it 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 to have combined the teaching of Navendu into Shrestha for a method and system of representing severity of a network alert. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to identify the alert level of the data center.
Thomson discloses transmitting an alert to a notification device via a radio frequency (RF) broadcast over a communications network that is separate from a primary communications network used by a computing equipment, the out-of-band communications network being configured to only communicate within an environment, wherein the local communication device does not rely on the primary communications network for delivery of the alert (para. [0011] broadcast fault report messages that may be received by other nodes of the wireless mesh network and forwarded to a controller or network management server. para. [0015] mesh access points in the mesh network… generally include one radio, operating in a first frequency band, and associated wireless communication functionality to communicate with other mesh access points to thereby implement the wireless backbone. para. [0027] mesh access point module collects fault data (404) and then logs the fault data. if the mesh access point module applies OOB management, the mesh access point module passes the fault data to the RFID tag 330). It 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 to have modified the system of Shrestha and Navendu with Thomson’s disclosure of transmitting alerts via RF broadcast over a network separate from a primary communications network within an environment such that the alerts are transmitted via RF broadcast within the data center of Shrestha. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial to provide an separate mode of communication, out-of-band, for reporting of faults (para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 5, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1. Shrestha further teaches wherein the set of alert preferences are configured by an administrator of the data center environment (para. [0065] "for a data center system administrator to be responsible for planning, initiating, and overseeing the execution of certain data center monitoring and management operations" para. [0066] "administrator may notice that one such alert may be associated with a data center issue that is more critical, or time sensitive, than the others data center administrator may elect to assume responsibility for remediating the data center issue, and as a result, proceed to perform an associated data center remediation operation at that time").
Regarding claim 12, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer system of claim 8. Shrestha further teaches wherein the set of alert preferences are configured by an administrator of the data center environment (para. [0065] "for a data center system administrator to be responsible for planning, initiating, and overseeing the execution of certain data center monitoring and management operations" para. [0066] "administrator may notice that one such alert may be associated with a data center issue that is more critical, or time sensitive, than the others data center administrator may elect to assume responsibility for remediating the data center issue, and as a result, proceed to perform an associated data center remediation operation at that time").
Regarding claim 19, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer program product of claim 15. Shrestha further teaches wherein the set of alert preferences are configured by an administrator of the data center environment (para. [0065] "for a data center system administrator to be responsible for planning, initiating, and overseeing the execution of certain data center monitoring and management operations" para. [0066] "administrator may notice that one such alert may be associated with a data center issue that is more critical, or time sensitive, than the others data center administrator may elect to assume responsibility for remediating the data center issue, and as a result, proceed to perform an associated data center remediation operation at that time").
Regarding claim 21, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the data center environment includes one or more broadcast repeaters configured to receive and re-transmit alerts from the local communication device throughout the data center environment (Shrestha teaches a “data center environment. Thomson further discloses: para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Regarding claim 23, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein communication between the local communication device and the on-premises alert notification device does not involve customer firewall infrastructure or external connectivity (Thomson: see fig. 1. para. [0013] wireless mesh network according to one implementation of the present invention. In one implementation, the wireless mesh network includes a wireless mesh controller 20, a root access point 21, and a plurality of child wireless mesh access points. para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Regarding claim 25, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computing system of claim 8, wherein the data center environment includes one or more broadcast repeaters configured to receive and re-transmit alerts from the local communication device throughout the data center environment (Shrestha teaches a “data center environment. Thomson further discloses: para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Regarding claim 27, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computing system of claim 8, wherein communication between the local communication device and the on-premises alert notification device does not involve customer firewall infrastructure or external connectivity (Thomson: see fig. 1. para. [0013] wireless mesh network according to one implementation of the present invention. In one implementation, the wireless mesh network includes a wireless mesh controller 20, a root access point 21, and a plurality of child wireless mesh access points. para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Regarding claim 29, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer program product of claim 15, wherein the data center environment includes one or more broadcast repeaters configured to receive and re-transmit alerts from the local communication device throughout the data center environment (Shrestha teaches a “data center environment. Thomson further discloses: para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Regarding claim 31, Shrestha in view of Navendu and Thomson teach the computer program product of claim 15, wherein communication between the local communication device and the on-premises alert notification device does not involve customer firewall infrastructure or external connectivity (Thomson: see fig. 1. para. [0013] wireless mesh network according to one implementation of the present invention. In one implementation, the wireless mesh network includes a wireless mesh controller 20, a root access point 21, and a plurality of child wireless mesh access points. para. [0031] transmitted fault report messages may be detected by one or more neighboring mesh access points, which may be configured to automatically forward received fault report messages to an appropriate wireless network infrastructure node).
Claims 4, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shrestha in
view of Navendu, Thomson, and Allen et al. US Publication No. 2022/0139205 (“Allen”).
Regarding claim 4, Shrestha and Navendu teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1. However, Shrestha and Navendu do not teach wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment.
Allen teaches wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment (para. [0004] "The alert management system may include an outlet hub, an LED hub, and one or more wearable alert activation devices." para. [0005] "Each client device may be configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal. The notification of the alert signal may include the type of alert signal that was transmitted." para. [0006] "notifying one or more client devices of the alert signal and the alert type from the data center"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Allen teaches a system and method for an alert management system. It 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 to combine the teaching of Allen into Shrestha and Navendu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to use the method and system to receive and identify the alert from data center (See [0005], "configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal").
Regarding claim 11, Shrestha and Navendu teach the computer system of claim 8. However, Shrestha and Navendu do not teach wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment.
Allen teaches wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment (para. [0004] "The alert management system may include an outlet hub, an LED hub, and one or more wearable alert activation devices." para. [0005] "Each client device may be configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal. The notification of the alert signal may include the type of alert signal that was transmitted." para. [0006] "notifying one or more client devices of the alert signal and the alert type from the data center"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Allen teaches a system and method for an alert management system. It 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 to combine the teaching of Allen into Shrestha and Navendu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to use the method and system to receive and identify the alert from data center (See [0005], "configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal").
Regarding claim 18, Shrestha and Navendu teach the computer program product of claim 15. However, Shrestha and Navendu do not teach wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment.
Allen teaches wherein the on-premises alert notification device is a wearable electronic device configured to be worn by a technician located in the data center environment (para. [0004] "The alert management system may include an outlet hub, an LED hub, and one or more wearable alert activation devices." para. [0005] "Each client device may be configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal. The notification of the alert signal may include the type of alert signal that was transmitted." para. [0006] "notifying one or more client devices of the alert signal and the alert type from the data center"). Shrestha teaches data center alerts. Navendu teaches method and system related to network fault trouble shooting option. Allen teaches a system and method for an alert management system. It 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 to combine the teaching of Allen into Shrestha and Navendu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been advantageous to use the method and system to receive and identify the alert from data center (See [0005], "configured to receive from the data center a notification of the alert signal").
Claims 24 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shrestha in
view of Navendu, Thomson and O’Toole US Patent Publication No. 2020/0358308 (“O’Toole”).
Regarding claim 24, Shrestha does not teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein one or more of the computing equipment, the monitoring devices, and the local communication device are configured to transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power.
O’Toole discloses one or more of computing equipment configured to transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power. (para. [0059] periodic keep-alive message to maintain the network connection. para. [0072] server 118 may send an alert to a user if there are issues with the UPS 200 such as loss of utility power, low battery runtime, battery disconnection). It 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 to have further modified the system of Shrestha and Navendu with O’Toole’s disclosure such that the devices as disclosed by Shrestha and Navendu transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been desirable to provide resilient network connectivity (para. [0048]).
Regarding claim 28, Shrestha does not teach the computing system of claim 8, wherein one or more of the computing equipment, the monitoring devices, and the local communication device are configured to transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power.
O’Toole discloses one or more of computing equipment configured to transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power. (para. [0059] periodic keep-alive message to maintain the network connection. para. [0072] server 118 may send an alert to a user if there are issues with the UPS 200 such as loss of utility power, low battery runtime, battery disconnection). It 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 to have further modified the system of Shrestha and Navendu with O’Toole’s disclosure such that the devices as disclosed by Shrestha and Navendu transmit keep-alive messages to ensure connectivity is valid and operating, and to transmit a dying event based on detection of a loss of input power. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been desirable to provide resilient network connectivity (para. [0048]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 26 and 30 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.
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 Joshua Joo whose telephone number is (571)272-3966. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at 571-270-1684. 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.
/JOSHUA JOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
