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
Applicant's submission filed on 12/17/2025 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-2, 5-15 is/are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
1. 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 1-2, 5-15 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.
Claim(s) 1, 7 is/are drawn to method (i.e., a process), claim(s) 8, 9, 11 is/are drawn to a system (i.e., a machine/manufacture), and claim(s) 10, 12 is/are drawn to non-transitory computer readable medium (i.e., a machine/manufacture). As such, claims 1, 7-9, 10-12 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-15 are directed to enhancing ims communications. Specifically, the claims recite establishing, when conducting an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) call with a second terminal, a data channel with a data server; collecting in real time audio/video data; establishing a data channel with a first terminal, wherein the first terminal is in an IMS call with a second terminal; receiving audio/video data sent from the first terminal through the data channel, which is grouped within the Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and is similar to the concept of (fundamental economic principles or practices including hedging insurance, mitigating risk) OR (commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors business relations) OR (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities teaching, and following rules or instructions) OR Mental Processes and is similar to the concept of (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 54 (January 7, 2019)). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 53-54 (January 7, 2019)).
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 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 54-55 (January 7, 2019)), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or generally link(s) the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, the memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor perform(s) the steps or functions of transmitting the collected audio/video data to the data server through the data channel, so that the data server generates first multimedia data according to the audio/video data and transmits the first multimedia data to the second terminal; generating, according to the audio/video data, first multimedia data, and transmitting the first multimedia data to the second terminal, and receiving the second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel, wherein the second multimedia data is generated according to audio/video data from the second terminal. The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out 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 claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do 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) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they 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 claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 56 (January 7, 2019)), the additional element(s) of using a memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor to perform the steps amounts to no more than using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of enhancing ims communications. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, the memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor perform(s) the steps or functions of transmitting the collected audio/video data to the data server through the data channel, so that the data server generates first multimedia data according to the audio/video data and transmits the first multimedia data to the second terminal; generating, according to the audio/video data, first multimedia data, and transmitting the first multimedia data to the second terminal, and receiving the second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel, wherein the second multimedia data is generated according to audio/video data from the second terminal. These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of enhancing ims communications. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 4-6, 8-15 further describe the abstract idea of enhancing ims communications. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
Ait-Ameur (U.S. Patent App Pub 20100312896 in view of Ding (U.S. Patent 11082557).
Regarding claim 1,
Ait-Ameur teaches a call method applied to a first terminal, the call method comprising: establishing, when conducting an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) call with a second terminal, a data channel with a data server; (See paragraphs 39-41, Ait-Ameur teaches IP call through server)
collecting in real time audio/video data; and (See paragraphs 39-40, 42, Ait-Ameur teaches collect av data)
transmitting the collected audio/video data to the data server through the data channel, so that the data server generates first multimedia data according to the audio/video data and transmits the first multimedia data to the second terminal.(See paragraphs 42-45, Ait-Ameur teaches transmitting av data to the device)
Ait-Ameur does not explicitly teach but Ding teaches wherein after establishing the data channel with the data server, the call method further comprises: requesting, in response to receiving a first call enhancement instruction through a first human-machine interaction interface provided by the first terminal, second multimedia data satisfying a multimedia data type from the data server; wherein the multimedia data type is acquired through the first human-machine interaction interface; and (See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call requesting an enhancement request)
receiving the second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel, wherein the second multimedia data is generated according to audio/video data from the second terminal.(See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call receiving an enhanced announcement at the UE)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Ding with Ait-Ameur because both deal with ims communications. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Ding into Ait-Ameur is that Ding teaches a telecommunications network provides quality and reliable multimedia communications, and improves service to speech-impaired or hearing-impaired customers to serve a broader customer base, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See col 1, Ding)
Regarding claim 3,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach the call method according to claim 1, wherein after establishing the data channel with the data server, the call method further comprises: receiving, in response to receiving a first call enhancement instruction through a first human-machine interaction interface provided by the first terminal, second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel, wherein the second multimedia data is generated according to the audio/video data from the second terminal. (See paragraphs 45-47, Ait-Ameur teaches generating av data for device)
Regarding claim 4,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach the call method according to claim 3, wherein after receiving the first call enhancement instruction through the first human-machine interaction interface provided by the first terminal, and before receiving the second multimedia data from the data server, the call method further comprises: requesting second multimedia data satisfying a multimedia data type from the data server; (See paragraphs 42-43, Ait-Ameur teaches request data )
wherein the multimedia data type is acquired through the first human-machine interaction interface. (See paragraphs 42-43, Ait-Ameur teaches different types of data)
Regarding claim 5,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a call method according to claim 1, wherein before establishing the data channel with the data server, the call method further comprises: monitoring an instruction sent from the second terminal; determining, according to the instruction, whether to establish the data channel; and proceeding, under a condition that the instruction indicates to establish the data channel, the operation of establishing the data channel with the data server. (See paragraphs 19, 39, Ait-Ameur creating a channel for the session)
Regarding claim 7,
Ait-Ameur teaches a call method applied to a data server, the call method comprising: establishing a data channel with a first terminal, wherein the first terminal is in an IMS call with a second terminal; (See paragraphs 39-41, Ait-Ameur teaches IP call through server)
receiving audio/video data sent from the first terminal through the data channel; and (See paragraphs 39-40, 42, Ait-Ameur teaches collect av data and send)
generating, according to the audio/video data, first multimedia data, and transmitting the first multimedia data to the second terminal. (See paragraphs 42-45, Ait-Ameur teaches generating av data to the device)
wherein after establishing the data channel with the first terminal, the call method further comprises: generating, in response to receiving a request from the first terminal for a second multimedia data satisfying a multimedia data type, the second multimedia data based on the audio and video data of the second terminal, and (See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call requesting an enhancement request)
sending the second multimedia data to the first terminal. (See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call receiving an enhanced announcement at the UE)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Ding with Ait-Ameur because both deal with ims communications. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Ding into Ait-Ameur is that Ding teaches a telecommunications network provides quality and reliable multimedia communications, and improves service to speech-impaired or hearing-impaired customers to serve a broader customer base, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See col 1, Ding)
Regarding claim 8,
Ait-Ameur teaches a call system, comprising: a first terminal, a second terminal and a data server, wherein the first terminal is communicatively connected with the data server, and the data server is communicatively connected with the second terminal; the first terminal is configured to establish, when conducting an IMS call with the second terminal, a data channel with the data server, and (See paragraphs 39-41, Ait-Ameur teaches IP call through server)collect in real time audio/video data, and transmit the collected audio/video data to the data server through the data channel; (See paragraphs 39-40, 42, Ait-Ameur teaches collect av data)
the data server is configured to generate, according to the audio/video data, first multimedia data, and transmit the first multimedia data to the second terminal; and the second terminal is configured to receive the first multimedia data. (See paragraphs 42-45, Ait-Ameur teaches transmitting av data to the device)
Ait-Ameur does not explicitly teach but Ding teaches wherein the first terminal is further configured to: request, in response to receiving a first call enhancement instruction through a first human-machine interaction interface provided by the first terminal, second multimedia data satisfying a multimedia data type from the data server; wherein the multimedia data type is acquired through the first human-machine interaction interface, and receive the second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel; and (See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call requesting an enhancement request)
wherein the data server is further configured to generate, in response to receiving the request from the first terminal for the second multimedia data, the second multimedia data according to audio/video data from the second terminal, and send the second multimedia data to the first terminal. (See column 5 line 35 to column 6 line 55, fig 2, Ding teaches during an enhanced call receiving an enhanced announcement at the UE)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Ding with Ait-Ameur because both deal with ims communications. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Ding into Ait-Ameur is that Ding teaches a telecommunications network provides quality and reliable multimedia communications, and improves service to speech-impaired or hearing-impaired customers to serve a broader customer base, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See col 1, Ding)
Regarding claim 9,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach an electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory communicatively connected with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to implement the call method according to claim 1. (See rejection to claim 1 and paragraphs 23-24, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 10,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon which, when executed by a processor, causes the call method according to claim 1 to be implemented. (See rejection to claim 1 and paragraph 26, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 11,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach an electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory communicatively connected with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to implement the call method according to claim 7. (See rejection to claim 1 and paragraphs 23-24, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 12,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon which, when executed by a processor, causes the call method according to claim 7 to be implemented. (See rejection to claim 7 and paragraphs 23-24, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 13,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a call method according to claim 1, wherein the collected audio/video data comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: audio data of a microphone, video data of a camera, or text data of audio. (See paragraphs 25, 16, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 14,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a call method according to claim 1, wherein the first multimedia data comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: a call recording, a call text, simultaneous interpretation data, a play of call video, or a meme image. (See paragraphs 25, 16, Ait-Ameur)
Regarding claim 15,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach a call method according to claim 3, wherein the second multimedia data comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: original audio data collected by the second terminal, a call text uploaded by the second terminal, a text converted by the data server from an original audio data of the second terminal, a text translated from simultaneous interpretation, or original audio and video data collected by the second terminal. (See paragraphs 25, 1, Ait-Ameur)
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ait-Ameur (U.S. Patent App Pub 20100312896) in view of Ding (U.S. Patent 11082557) in view of Hawley (U.S. Patent App Pub 20120307989).
Regarding claim 2,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach the call method according to claim 1.
Ait-Ameur and Ding do not explicitly teach but Hawley teaches wherein after establishing the data channel with the data server, the call method further comprises: releasing, in response to the IMS call being hung up, the data channel established with the data server; re-establishing, in response to receiving a second call enhancement instruction through a second human-machine interaction interface provided by the first terminal, the data channel with the data server; and (See paragraphs 32, 33, 89-90, figure 4-5, Hawley)
receiving third multimedia data from the data server through the re-established data channel; wherein the third multimedia data is generated according to the audio/video data in a process of the IMS call. (See paragraphs 91-92, figure 4-5, Hawley)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Hawley with Ait-Ameur and Ding because both deal with ims communications. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Hawley into Ait-Ameur and Ding is that Hawley teaches a multimedia call capability supports establishment of data session in conjunction with the call. The call is directed to the PSAP and/or the private answering point. The multimedia call capability enables dynamic routing of call signaling of the user device to the answering point based on the inclusion of the media content capture capability. The data session supports propagation of media content from the user device to the answering point in conjunction with the call, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0006] - [0007], Hawley)
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ait-Ameur (U.S. Patent App Pub 20100312896) in view of Ding (U.S. Patent 11082557)in view of Bakker (U.S. Patent App Pub 20100103927).
Regarding claim 6,
Ait-Ameur and Ding teach the call method according to claim 5, wherein monitoring the instruction sent from the second terminal comprises: monitoring session initiation protocol (SIP) signaling sent from the second terminal; (See paragraphs 19, 39, 41, Ait-Ameur teaches establish channel) and
Ait-Ameur and Ding do not explicitly teach but Bakker teaches wherein determining, according to the instruction, whether to establish the data channel comprises: determining whether to establish the data channel according to a dcmap field carried in the SIP signaling. (See paragraphs 80, 33, Bakker)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Bakker with Ait-Ameur and Ding because both deal with ims communications. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Bakker into Ait-Ameur and Ding is that Bakker teaches the setup message including the information element indicating the call-waiting-tone-on is sent by the mobile switching center to the user equipment when the invite message includes call waiting indication, redirection of the call quickly to the voice mail can be avoided, while reducing the duration of the ringing or tone period to minimize the disturbance associated with the incoming calls, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0010] - [0018], Bakker)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong One. As for Step 2A Prong One, of the Abstract idea is directed towards the abstract idea of enhancing ims communications which is grouped within the Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and is similar to the concept of (fundamental economic principles or practices including hedging insurance, mitigating risk) OR (commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors business relations) OR (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities teaching, and following rules or instructions) OR Mental Processes and is similar to the concept of (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 54 (January 7, 2019)). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 53-54 (January 7, 2019)).
B. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong Two. As for Step 2A Prong Two, the claim limitations do not include additional elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, and the claim is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception and the claim limitation simply describe the abstract idea. The limitation directed to enhancing ims communications does not add technical improvement to the abstract idea. The recitations to memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor perform(s) the steps or functions of transmitting the collected audio/video data to the data server through the data channel, so that the data server generates first multimedia data according to the audio/video data and transmits the first multimedia data to the second terminal; generating, according to the audio/video data, first multimedia data, and transmitting the first multimedia data to the second terminal, and receiving the second multimedia data from the data server through the data channel, wherein the second multimedia data is generated according to audio/video data from the second terminal. The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out 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 claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do 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) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they 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 claims are directed to an abstract idea.
C. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2B.
As for Step 2B, The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 56 (January 7, 2019)), the limitation directed to enhancing ims communications does not add significantly more to the abstract idea. Furthermore, using well-known computer functions to execute an abstract idea does not constitute significantly more. The recitations to memory, non-transitory computer readable storage medium, and a processor are generically recited computer structure. These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of enhancing ims communications. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and located in the PTO-892 form.
1.Lawson, U.S. Patent 9894121, teaches a method and system for operating a multitenancy telephony system including a call queue that stores call requests received from a plurality of users; an expandable and contractible telephony resource cluster that establishes call sessions for call requests; a analysis system that calculates capacity requirements of the system; a resource allocator that manages the scaling and operation of the telephony resource cluster; and a plurality of telephony network channels that are used as telephony communication channels for call sessions.
2. Pearce, U.S. Patent App 20150200974, teaches techniques are described herein for facilitating a connection between a cloud networking platform and a unified communication system, where the cloud networking platform hosts communication services including real-time communications for client devices, and the unified communication system hosts communication services including real-time communications for on-prem devices that are associated with the unified communication system. Events associated with the cloud networking platform are monitored at the unified communication system, via a cloud connector device of the unified communication system, where events are associated with users who are registered with client devices and on-prem devices, and the events include real-time communications. A notification is provided to one or more client devices registered to a first user in response to an on-prem device also registered to the first user receiving a real-time communication request from a device of another user.
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 NINOS DONABED whose telephone number is (571)272-8757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00pm - 4:00pm.
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, John FOLLANSBEE can be reached on (571)272-3964. 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.
/NINOS DONABED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444