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 Application
This action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination filed October 1, 2025. Claims 3, 15 and 27 are canceled. Claims 1-2, 13 and 25 have been amended. Claims 1-2, 4-14, 16-26, 28-36 are pending and have been examined in this application. The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed on December 3, 2025 has been acknowledged.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/1/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Specifically, claims 1-36 are directed toward at least abstract idea without significantly more. In accordance with MPEP § 2106, the rationale for this determination is explained below.
Representative claim 1 is directed towards a system, which is a statutory category of invention.
Although, claim 1 is directed toward a statutory category of invention, the claim appears to be directed toward a judicial exception namely an abstract idea. The limitations that set forth the abstract idea recites: send the destination information to at least one vendor for a vendor to obtain at least one item for display, wherein the at least one item is selected based in part on the destination information and the vendor is located off the aircraft and communication with the vendor is performed over a satellite network; receive the at least one item to be displayed; and send the at least one item to be displayed, wherein enables a passenger on the aircraft to interact with the at least one item. These limitations, entail commercial interactions including, marketing or sales activities and business relations; as well as managing personal behavior or interactions including following rules or instructions. As such, the limitations are directed towards the abstract grouping of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) II).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (see MPEP 2106.04(d)), the additional elements provided by the claim amount to merely using a computer as a tool to apply an abstract idea, or instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. In particular the claim recites the additional elements: to obtain destination information from an aircraft data bus, wherein the aircraft data bus receives aircraft flight information from a plurality of aircraft information systems located on the aircraft. This amount to insignificant extra-solution activity because this is necessary data gathering and selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, the limitations referring to at least one processor; a memory device including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to; application programming interface (API), a server, electronic offering, in an inflight entertainment system, electronic offering, server, server; electronic offering, in the inflight entertainment system; electronic offering, to a client device, via the inflight entertainment system, a graphical interface of the inflight entertainment system at the client device, electronic offering, which are recited at a high level of generality, merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the abstract ideas. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Simply adding insignificant extra-solution activity and applying the abstract idea by a computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claim does not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claim does not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claim does not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e)). Therefore, the claim does not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor does it effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claim is directed to abstract ideas.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional limitations amount to insignificant extra-solution activity and instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer. Viewing these limitations individually, the obtaining destination information from an aircraft data bus, wherein the aircraft data bus receives aircraft flight information from a plurality of aircraft information systems located on the aircraft; and the receiving the at least one electronic offering item to be displayed in the inflight entertainment, are used only for data gathering and obtaining particular data type extra-solution activities. Furthermore, the courts have recognized automating mental tasks and receiving or transmitting data over a network to be well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner or as insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d)II; Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2016); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Moreover, the limitation generically referring to a processor, memory device, application programming interface, electronic offering, in an inflight entertainment system, a client device, a graphical interface, do not constitute significantly more because they are simply an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular technological environment1. Viewing these limitations as a combination, the additional elements amount to no more than merely applying the exception using generic computer components, executing automating functions of a computer. Merely applying an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the limitations of the claim as a whole, when viewed individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
A review of dependent claims 2-12, likewise, do not recite any limitations that would remedy the deficiencies outlined above. The claims only further add to the abstract idea, with no elements which integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or constitute significantly more. For instance, claims 2-12 only add to the abstract idea. Thus, while they may slightly narrow the abstract idea by further describing it, they do not make it less abstract and are rejected accordingly. Further still, claims 13-36 suffer from substantially the same deficiencies as outlined with respect to claims 1-12 and are also rejected accordingly.
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 of this title, 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, 3, 5, 9-13, 15, 17, 21-25, 27, 29 and 33-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Proud (US Publication 2010/0070376) in view of Keen (US Publication 2011/0313826).
A. In regards to Claims 1, 13 and 25, Proud discloses a system, method and non-transitory machine readable storage medium comprising:
at least one processor; [0049];
and a memory device including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to: Proud [0049];
obtain destination information; Proud [0047: information pertaining to flight schedules, departures, destinations, and status, received from the various airlines; 0086: flight data may be received by the system. Flight data may include information relating to flight departure and arrival times, departure and arrival locations, and other like information];
send the destination information to at least one vendor application programming interface (API) for a vendor server to obtain at least one electronic offering item for display in an inflight entertainment system, wherein the at least one electronic offering item is selected based in part on the destination information and the vendor server is located off the aircraft and communication with the vendor server is performed over a satellite network; Proud [0048: GuestLogix Servers interface with computer systems of each of vendors/suppliers; 0056: vendors/suppliers, and airlines exchanging data via connector modules, the data from each party can be standardized, or can be unique; 0057: the connectors include a translator; translator uses web services to exchange information with each party in that party's native format; web services can utilize an applications programming interface (API) approach; 0070: product/service data is sent by vendors or suppliers; 0058: system communicate with the vendor/supplier connector modules, and automatically determine, based on the product data and on the transportation data, subsets of the products or services to be sold or delivered on board, with each of the subsets corresponding to a specific mobile retail environment instance; 0110: on-board In-flight Entertainment (IFE) Server with the GuestLogix POS solution, enables the integration of catalogues of products/services, and facilitates the on-board purchase; 0086: product and/or service data is received by system from one or more vendors. The product and/or service data including flight/destination specific information regarding the availability of products and/or services; 0049: POS devices are mounted on-board the aircraft, such as in the back of most seats or in the bulkhead walls; 0064: communications with the POS devices can be via satellite communications, or via any other suitable data communications arrangement];
receive the at least one electronic offering item to be displayed in the inflight entertainment system; Proud [0070: product/service data is sent by vendors or suppliers; 0086: product and/or service data is received by system from one or more vendors 0110: on-board In-flight Entertainment (IFE) Server with the GuestLogix POS solution, enables the integration of catalogues of products/services, adds prices and conditions, and facilitates the on-board purchase];
and send the at least one electronic offering item to a client device to be displayed via the inflight entertainment system, wherein a graphical interface of the inflight entertainment system at the client device enables a passenger on the aircraft to interact with the at least one electronic offering item; 0049: GuestLogix Servers are also interfaced with point-of-sale (POS) devices situated on-board each of the aircraft; POS devices are mounted on-board the aircraft, such as in the back of most seats or in the bulkhead walls; these types of devices can be integrated with on-board media players that display videos and videogames, output sound to a set of headphones, and can include a touchscreen 0076: hotels, attractions, or events may be presented consistent with one or more arrival destinations indicated by flight schedules; flight specific in-flight goods and/or services may be determined and presented to passenger; 0084: sales may also be collected based on one or more interactions with a seat back device; 0095: passenger may select, from a mobile retail environment, one or more products and/or services for purchase];
Proud does not specifically disclose, obtain destination information from an aircraft data bus, wherein the aircraft data bus receives aircraft flight information from a plurality of aircraft information systems located on the aircraft; this is disclosed by Keen [FIG. 5: depicts aircraft information obtained from the aircraft data bus; 0089: current location of the aircraft may be provided by a position determining/flight path determining, such as a GPS system carried by the aircraft; final destination of the aircraft can also be displayed prior to arrival at the destination];
additionally and/or alternatively Keen discloses at least one electronic offering item to a client device to be displayed via the inflight entertainment system, wherein a graphical interface of the inflight entertainment system at the client device enables a passenger on the aircraft to interact with the at least one electronic offering item. Keen [0090: data associated with the destination may also be made available to the passengers; from a PED, data categories titled Hotels, Rental Cars, Restaurants and Entertainment are available for viewing by the passenger; 0017: aircraft IFE system may further comprises at least one IFE wireless transceiver, and the PED controller may also register with the IFE controller upon communicating. The registration may be based on the IFE controller also generating a respective registration token image on each IFE passenger seat display; 0015: PED controller may communicate with the aircraft transceiver via the PED wireless transceiver to complete transaction of purchase based upon communicating external the aircraft via the aircraft transceiver].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Proud with the teachings from Keen with the motivation to configure an electronic device to operate as a commerce device while a passenger is onboard an aircraft enabling the passenger to initiate purchase of different products and services as advertised by the aircraft IFE system. Keen [0014].
B. In regards to Claims 4, 16 and 28, Proud does not specifically disclose, obtain an electronic offering item from a cache of electronic offering items stored on a data store located on the aircraft when communication with the vendor server cannot be established. This is disclosed by Keen [0087: data memory cache may be configured to push the common data related to the services and products to the PEDs; 0094: once web pages are stored in the data memory cache, a passenger using their enabled PED can access and browse the web pages for on-board shopping while the aircraft is airborne]. The motivation being the same as stated in claim 1. The motivation being the same as stated in claim 1.
C. In regards to Claims 5, 17 and 29, Proud discloses, associate an electronic offering item with a categorized grouping of offers displayed in the graphical interface of the inflight entertainment system. Proud [0127: categories help the merchandising and retail manager group the different products and services offered on-board by affinity of use or consumption, popularity, specific time when they are offered, specific service or product brand name].
D. In regards to Claims 9, 21 and 33, Proud discloses, wherein the aircraft flight information includes: an aircraft origin, an aircraft destination, a passenger destination, an estimated arrival time, an arrival gate, a current latitude and longitude of the aircraft, a current aircraft speed, a current aircraft altitude, a seatbelt warning status, a passenger service status, or an origin weather report. Proud [0086: flight data may be received by the system. Flight data may include information relating to flight departure and arrival times, departure and arrival locations, and other like information].
E. In regards to Claims 10, 22 and 34, Proud discloses, wherein a network connection between the system and the client device is a wireless connection established via a wireless access point onboard the aircraft. Proud [0128: products or services can be offered virtually by means of online access, either within the onboard local network or on-board Internet access].
F. In regards to Claims 11, 23 and 35, Proud discloses, wherein the client device is a seatback system on the aircraft, and a connection between a server on the aircraft and the seatback system is a wired or wireless connection. Proud [0102: personalized programming and access to news, other multimedia as well as the Internet are available through on-board seatback or on-seat multimedia screens; 0049: POS devices are mounted on-board the aircraft, such as in the back of most seats; 0064: Communications with the POS devices can be via satellite communications, terrestrial cellular network, or via any other suitable data communications arrangement].
G. In regards to Claims 12, 24 and 36, Proud discloses, wherein the client device is a personal electronic device. Proud [0101: handheld device is designed for the passenger travel industry to facilitate all on-board sale and refund transactions; the GuestLogix POS Back-Office software using wireless communications (GSM/GPRS, CDMA) or direct plug-in using USB. GuestLogix may propose other device configurations with PCI PED compliance to meet the specific needs of its clients].
Claims 2, 8, 14, 20, 24 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Proud (US Publication 2010/0070376) in view of Keen (US Publication 2011/0313826) in further view of Fernandez (US Publication 2015/0248696).
A. In regards to Claims 2, 14 and 24, Proud does not specifically disclose, wherein a vendor API is for a vendor server, and the vendor API is configured to: retrieve an electronic offering item having metadata that links the electronic offering item to the destination information from an offering data store; this is disclosed by Fernandez [0065: vendor uses the vendor-facing interface to define its inventory data schema, API operations, and policy conditions. This vendor-supplied detail can be processed in an automated manner by the inventory-management system to service inventory for the vendor];
and send the electronic offering item to be displayed in the inflight entertainment system. Fernandez [0028: marketing system, via the unified interface, can push advertisements for purchasing vendor services and products that are relevant to the consumer's flight, destination, or food purchase, Internet access, movie or entertainment download, car or rail transportation, accommodations, or city tour, etc.].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Proud with the teachings from Fernandez with the motivation to provide multiple interactions back and forth between an Application Programming Interface that permits communications to be delivered and processed between an interface operating on a channel device used by or used on behalf of the consumer and vendor interface. Fernandez [0023,0034].
B. In regards to Claims 8, 20 and 32, Proud does not specifically disclose, obtain a passenger profile for the passenger associated with the client device; this is disclosed by Fernandez [[0024: customer identifying information is extracted to access the loyalty system and acquire a then-existing profile for the consumer];
and send passenger information in the passenger profile to the vendor API to allow the passenger information to be used in part to select the at least one electronic offering item to be displayed to the passenger in the inflight entertainment system. Fernandez [0031: loyalty system can include a variety of sub loyalty systems defined by the vendors or suppliers via the automated (API calls from processing applications); each customer loyalty record is associated with a customer profile; some fields of each record can link to the analytics system for dynamic calculation or resolution when a particular profile of a customer is served for a transaction; 0028: the consumer may need to take no action because the unified interface transmits the confirmation of what was purchased to devices that are controlled by the airline staff or supplier along with a profile data for the consumer, such that the airline staff or supplier can deliver the appropriate good or service to the consumer]. The motivation being the same as stated in claim 2.
Claims 6-7, 18-19 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Proud (US Publication 2010/0070376) in view of Keen (US Publication 2011/0313826) in further view of Hoang (US Publication 2021/0124466).
A. In regards to Claims 6, 18 and 30, Proud discloses, evaluate the aircraft flight information to determine a current status of a flight; Proud [0047: information pertaining to flight schedules, departures, destinations, and status, is combined with information relating to the various products and services];
Proud does not specifically disclose and determine whether to obtain an electronic offering item for display in the inflight entertainment system based in part on the current status of the flight. This is disclosed by Hoang [0029: extract the portion of the map data around the current position of the airplane for serving the map to the seatback devices and PEDs; 0039: IFE system can be configured to provide the candidate movie contents based on the current location of the airplane]. The motivation being the same as stated in claim 1.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Proud with the teachings from Hoang with the motivation to provide entertainment contents (e.g., movie, music, products, etc.) that are related to certain areas (e.g., countries or cities) on the world, when the certain areas are determined based on at least one of the passenger information, travel information, or communication with the passengers. Hoang [0033].
B. In regards to Claims 7, 19 and 31, Proud does not specifically disclose, obtain interaction data for passenger interaction with the inflight entertainment system; this is disclosed by Hoang [0051: IFE system can record the activities of passengers, e.g., shopping, dining, entertaining, etc.];
and determine whether to obtain an electronic offering item for display in the inflight entertainment system based in part on the interaction data. Hoang [0053: some implementation the activity log of the passenger is obtained based on previous requests from the media playback device; 0030: the IFE system operates to provide corresponding contents to the passengers in communication with at least one of the seatback devices the PEDs]. The motivation being the same as stated in claim 6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's filed arguments have been fully considered but have not been found persuasive.
A. Applicant's arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection that the pending claims recite limitations for selecting and obtaining electronic offering items using destination information received from an aircraft data bus and using destination information from an aircraft data bus to obtain electronic offering items, which is not an abstract idea that falls within any of the groupings defined by the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance; and further that the claims are not directed to advertising or marketing behaviors performed by humans; but rather electronic offering items selection or filter performed by computer systems. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims are grouped under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity because they are directed to marketing or sales activities and business relations; (offering items for purchase to inflight passengers based on their destinations) as well as managing personal behavior or interactions including following rules or instructions (monitoring passenger interaction with offered item). That the items are selected or filtered by computer systems does not assuage the abstract idea as this is merely applying the abstract idea by a computer. See at least, TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“It is well-settled that mere recitation of concrete, tangible components is insufficient to confer patent eligibility to an otherwise abstract idea”).
Applicant submits that the pending claims recite limitations for an improvement in a computer-related technology, namely, improvements for selecting or filtering electronic offering items based on destination information from an aircraft data bus. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s claims do not provide for filtering the offering items, neither does the specification. Notwithstanding, selecting or filtering electronic offering items based on destination information is an abstract idea in and of itself, aimed toward providing users targeted offering items for purchase. That the items are electronic, and information is received from an aircraft data bus amounts to the mere use of computer components to apply the abstract idea, which do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor provide an inventive concept. Id.
Applicant argues that features recited in the pending claims, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 1 provides for obtaining destination information from an aircraft data bus, wherein the aircraft data bus receives aircraft flight information from a plurality of aircraft information systems located on the aircraft. This amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity because it is necessary data gathering and selecting a particular data source or type of data to implement the abstract idea. While, sending destination information to a vendor application programming interface (API) to obtain at least one electronic offering item for display in an inflight entertainment system, wherein the electronic offering item is selected based in part on the destination information, is an abstract idea aimed towards sending passenger information to a vendor so as to provide a targeted offered item based on the passenger’s destination. The abstract idea being implemented via an API does not amount to significantly more. Viewed in combination, these limitations do not provide additional elements that are unconventional or non-routine and are thus, not significantly more.
Applicant contends the present claims are similar to the case of BASCOM because electronic offering items are filtered or selected using the destination information from an aircraft data bus, and due to this similarity to Bascom, the present claims provide a technology-based solution for filtering or obtaining electronic offering items using destination information from an aircraft data bus. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s claims are not analogous because they have different claim sets, different fact patterns and do not reflect any technical improvement as was found in BASCOM. In BASCOM, the court agreed that the concept of filtering content was an abstract idea; however, the claims were found to be significantly more since they did not merely recite the abstract idea along with the requirement to perform it on the Internet, or on a set of generic computer components. The inventive concept was found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of known, conventional pieces, because although, filtering content on the Internet was already a known concept, the patent described how its particular arrangement of elements was a technical improvement over prior art ways of filtering content. Thus, like BASCOM, Applicant’s claims are directed to an abstract concept but unlike BASCOM, they do not improve any technology neither are they unconventional. See 101 analysis above.
As such, the claims in view of Alice do not connote an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer itself; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection is maintained.
B. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection, Applicant argues that the references do not teach or suggest sending the destination information to at least one vendor application programming interface (API) to obtain at least one electronic offering item for display in an inflight entertainment system. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Proud discloses that its GuestLogix Servers interface with computer systems of each of the vendors/suppliers; Proud [0048]; and that the vendor and supplier connectors facilitate the exchange of data representing products and services to be offered using various data protocols specific each type of vendor or supplier; Proud [0054]; and, the connectors include a translator; the translator uses web services to exchange information with each party in that party's native format; whereby, web services can utilize an applications programming interface (API) approach; Proud [0057]; and the system communicate with the vendor/supplier connector modules (API), and automatically determine, based on the product data and on the transportation data, subsets of the products or services to be sold or delivered on board, with each of the subsets corresponding to a specific mobile retail environment instance; Proud [0058]; where the system includes a carrier connector module that is constructed to facilitate automated exchange of transportation data over a computer network, wherein the transportation data includes vehicle and departure/arrival information; Proud [0012]. Also, on-board In-flight Entertainment (IFE) Server with the GuestLogix POS solution, enables the integration of catalogues of products/services, adds prices and conditions, and facilitates the on-board purchase; Proud [0101]; product and/or service data is received by system from one or more vendors. The product and/or service data (from the vendor) including flight/destination specific information regarding the availability of products and/or services. Proud [0086]. Applicant’s other arguments are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection.
C. Applicant’s arguments regarding claims 13 and 25 are rejected accordingly to independent claim 1. Applicant’s arguments regarding the dependent claims 2-12, 14-24 and 26-36 are rejected accordingly to independent claims 1, 13 and 25.
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 extension fee 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 Errol CARVALHO whose telephone number is (571)272-9987. The Examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30-7:00 Alt Fri
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ilana Spar can be reached on 571- 270-7537. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/E CARVALHO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622
1 See, Alice Corp. Pty Ltd. v. CLS Bank lnt'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2360 (2014) (noting that none of the hardware recited “offers a meaningful limitation beyond generally linking ‘the use of the [method] to a particular technological environment,’ that is, implementation via computers” (citing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 610-11 (2010))).