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 Claims
This is in reply to communication filed on 07/28/2026.
Claims 1-20 have been cancelled.
Claims 21-40 are currently pending.
Claims 32-38 remain withdrawn as been drawn to nonelected invention.
Claims 21-31 and 39-40 are currently pending and have been examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-31 and 39-40 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. US12118525B2 (hereinafter “Ans525”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 21. (New) A processor-implemented method programmed in a non-transitory processor-readable medium and executable on one or more processors of a kiosk configured to execute the method, comprising: (Ans525, claim 1; “A processor-implemented method programmed in a non-transitory processor-readable medium and executable on one or more processors of a kiosk configured to execute the method, comprising”)
authenticating, via the kiosk, a user for access to transact with the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 1; “authenticating, via the kiosk, a user for access to transact with the kiosk”)
obtaining, via the kiosk, a user identifier for the user based on the authenticating; (Ans525, claim 1; “obtaining, via the kiosk, a user identifier for the user based on the authenticating”)
initiating, via the kiosk, a transaction comprising a transaction identifier that enabled the user to transact with the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 1; “initiating, via the kiosk, a transaction comprising a transaction identifier that enabled for the user to transact with the kiosk”)
detecting, via the kiosk, activation of a remoting feature at the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 1; “detecting, via the kiosk activation of a remoting feature at the kiosk”)
causing, via the kiosk and based on the user identifier and the transaction identifier, a link to be sent to a mobile device of the user in response to detecting activation of the remoting feature; (Ans525, claim 1; “causing, via the kiosk and based on the user identifier, the transaction identifier, and a mobile device identifier associated with a mobile device of the user and obtained based on the user identifier, a link to be sent to the mobile device in response to detecting activation of the remoting feature being activated”) and
permitting, via the kiosk, the user to continue transacting via the kiosk using the mobile device responsive to activation of the link on the mobile device. (Ans525, claim 1; “permitting, via the kiosk, the user to continue transacting via the kiosk using the mobile device responsive to activation of the link on the mobile device”)
Regarding claim 22. (New) The method of claim 21, wherein authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a card swiped to authenticate the user. (Ans525, claim 4; “wherein authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a card swiped to authenticate the user”)
Regarding claim 23. (New) The method of claim 21, wherein authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a code automatically transmitted from the mobile device of the user to authenticate the user. (Ans525, claim 5; “wherein authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a code automatically transmitted from the mobile device of the user to authenticate the user”)
Regarding claim 24. (New) The method of claim 23, wherein interacting further includes automatically communicating with the mobile device via one of: Near Field Communication, a wireless transmission, or Wi-Fi. (Ans525, claim 6; “wherein interacting further includes automatically communicating with the mobile device via one of: Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy, Radio Frequency, Near Field Communication, and WiFi”)
Regarding claim 25. (New) The method of claim 21, wherein detecting further includes detecting a special key pressed by the user at the kiosk to initiate the remoting feature. (Ans525, claim 7; “wherein detecting further includes detecting a special key pressed by the user at the kiosk to initiate the remoting feature”)
Regarding claim 26. (New) The method of claim 21, wherein detecting further includes acquiring a wireless encrypted instruction from the mobile device of the user to initiate the remoting feature. (Ans525, claim 8; “wherein detecting further includes acquiring a wireless encrypted instruction from the mobile device of the user to initiate the remoting feature”)
Regarding claim 27. (New) The method of claim 21, wherein causing further includes instructing a proxy agent on a remote server to send the link to the mobile device. (Ans525, claim 1; “wherein causing further includes instructing a proxy agent on a remote server to send the link to the mobile device”)
Regarding claim 28. (New) The method of claim 27, wherein instructing further includes informing the proxy agent on a manner in which the link is to be sent to the mobile device based on a preference associated with the user. (Ans525, claim 1; “wherein instructing further includes informing the proxy agent on a manner in which the link is to be sent to the mobile device based on a preference associated with the user”)
Regarding claim 29. (New) The method of claim 28, wherein the preference is obtained from a profile of the user and the preference indicates that the link is to be sent to the user in a text, an email, or a message to an application. (Ans525, claim 1; “wherein the preference is obtained from a profile of the user and the preference indicates that the link is to be sent to the user in a text, an email, or a message to an application”)
Regarding claim 30. (New) The method of claim 21 further comprising, processing the method within a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) that is the kiosk. (Ans525, claim 2; “comprising, processing the method within a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) that is the kiosk”)
Regarding claim 31. (New) The method of claim 30 further comprising, providing, via the link, interactive teller assistance to the user on the mobile device. (Ans525, claim 3; “comprising, providing, via the link, interactive teller assistance to the user on the mobile device”)
Regarding claim 39. (New) A system comprising: (Ans525, claim 9; “A system comprising:”)
a kiosk having memory programmed with a kiosk agent that executes on processors of the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 9; “a kiosk having memory programmed with a kiosk agent that executes on processors of the kiosk”) and
a server having memory programmed with a proxy agent that executes on processors of the server; (Ans525, claim 9; “a server having memory programmed with a proxy agent that executes on processors of the server”)
wherein the kiosk agent is configured to:
authenticate a user for a transaction with the kiosk through interactions of the user with the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 9; “wherein the kiosk agent is configured to: authenticate a user for a transaction with the kiosk through interactions of the user with the kiosk”)
obtain a user identifier based on authentication of the user; (Ans525, claim 9; “obtain a user identifier based on authentication of the user”)
initiate a transaction comprising a transaction identifier that enables the user to transact with the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 9; “initiate a transaction comprising a transaction identifier that enables the user to transact with the kiosk”)
detect activation of a remoting feature activated at the kiosk; (Ans525, claim 9; “detect activation of a remoting feature activated at the kiosk”) and
instruct the proxy agent to send a link to a mobile device using the transaction identifier and the user identifier, wherein when the link is activated from the mobile device, the transaction continues with the kiosk via an interface associated with the link from the mobile device. (Ans525, claim 9; “instruct the proxy agent to send a link to a mobile device using the transaction identifier and the user identifier to obtain a mobile device identifier for the mobile device, wherein the link is a universal resource locator (URL) that is configured to be activated within a browser of the mobile device and the link is packaged with the transaction identifier and user identifier, and when the link is activated from the mobile device, the transaction continues with the kiosk via an interface associated with the link from the mobile device”)
Regarding claim 40. (New) The system of claim 39, wherein the kiosk is a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) and the interface is for remote interactive teller assistance provided on the mobile device to the user during the transaction. (Ans525, claim 10; “wherein the kiosk is a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) and the interface is for remote interactive teller assistance provided on the mobile device to the user during the transaction”)
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 21, 25-26, 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Calman et al. (US20120265679A1, hereinafter “Calman”) in view of Kobres (US20130110727A1, hereinafter “Kobres”).
Regarding claims 21 and 39. Calman discloses a processor-implemented method programmed in a non-transitory processor-readable medium and executable on one or more processors of a kiosk configured to execute the method, comprising:
authenticating, via the kiosk, a user for access to transact with the kiosk; (Calman discloses authentication using passcode or biometric credentials when initiating the ATM session in Event 302 where user verifies their identity through input of authentication credentials, such as passcode, biometric data or the like, see [0066])
obtaining, via the kiosk, a user identifier for the user based on the authenticating; (Calman discloses user ID/name among authentication credentials available for session transfer, see [0036], [0055], the user interaction session includes a user authentication process whereby the user verifies their identity through input of authentication credentials, such as passcode, biometric data or the like, see [0066])
initiating, via the kiosk, a transaction (Calman discloses initiation of an ATM interaction session encompassing financial transactions as automated computing device configured to provide financial institution transactions, activities, experiences or the like, see [0066])
detecting, via the kiosk, activation of a remoting feature at the kiosk; (Calman discloses transfer can be initiated by touching an identified touchscreen area or entering a designated keystroke, customer’s transfer request input triggers SMS generation and transmission, [0044-0046])
causing, via the kiosk and based on the user identifier (Calman discloses the secure communication includes a URL 130, the communication may additionally include the user/customer authentication credentials 134 used to initiate the session on the ATM 102, such that the credentials 134 are automatically applied when activating the URL 130, see [0055]), a link to be sent to a mobile device of the user in response to detecting activation of the remoting feature; (Calman discloses transfer-request input causes automatic transmission of an SMS containing session- access URL and potentially authentication credentials, see [0044], and the URL links to the existing interaction session and carries its authentication credential, see [0055]) and
permitting, via the kiosk, the user to continue transacting via the kiosk using the mobile device responsive to activation of the link on the mobile device. (Calman discloses describing the ATM sending a session access URL and activation of that URL allowing the user to continue the existing ATM transaction session on the mobile device, see [0044], [0055] and [0069]. In addition, further explains that its ATM includes network-accessible application and modules conducting the interaction session in secure nature, see [0036])
Calman substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, Calman fails to explicitly disclose the “comprising a transaction identifier that enabled the user to transact with the kiosk; and instruction link sent based on the transaction identifier”. However, Kobres teaches
comprising a transaction identifier that enabled the user to transact with the kiosk; and instruction link sent based on the transaction identifier (Kobres teaches the business web application calls a mobile transaction web service with a transaction Identifier (ID), unique session ID, or other information necessary to conduct the transaction. The Transaction System returns barcode and string data containing the portal Uniform Resource Locator (URL) and the unique transaction ID, digitally signed with the private key of the business. The web site displays the barcode or string, such that the consumer's mobile device can acquire the string, see [0015-0018])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include comprising a transaction identifier that enabled the user to transact with the kiosk; and instruction link sent based on the transaction identifier, as taught by Kobres, where this would be performed in order to reduce any security risk and prevent any slows down the transaction and if the consumer enters one wrong number for an account the whole transaction can be denied. See Kobres [0004].
Regarding claim 25. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21, wherein detecting further includes detecting a special key pressed by the user at the kiosk to initiate the remoting feature.(Calman discloses ATM 102 includes a plurality of user/customer interaction applications 126 that provide for the “touch” an identified area of a touch-screen display or enter a designated keystroke on the keypad to transfer a session to user device, see [0045-0046])
Regarding claim 26. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21, wherein detecting further includes acquiring a wireless encrypted instruction from the mobile device of the user to initiate the remoting feature. (Calman discloses the transfer of the user interaction session may be initiated by receiving, at the ATM, a transfer input, such as in response to a customer being asked if they desire to transfer the interaction session to their mobile communication device, the transfer request may be communicated wirelessly via any known or future known wireless communication mechanism, see [0012], such as information may be communicated as encrypted data and subsequently decrypted at the mobile communication device, see [0043])
Claims 22, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Gill et al. (US20120226610A1, hereinafter “Gill”).
Regarding claim 22. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21, wherein
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a card swiped to authenticate the user”. However, Gill teaches:
authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a card swiped to authenticate the user. (Gill teaches Block 715 represents the ATM 200 authenticating the customer, by swiping a debit card associated with the account and entering a PIN at the ATM 200 prior to establishing the contactless connection, see [0085])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a card swiped to authenticate the user, as taught by Gill, where this would be performed in order to reduce security issues. See Gill [0003].
Regarding claim 23. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21, wherein
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a code automatically transmitted from the mobile device of the user to authenticate the user”. However, Gill teaches:
authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a code automatically transmitted from the mobile device of the user to authenticate the user. (Gill teaches Block 715 represents the ATM 200 authenticating the customer, as authentication of contactless connection being established prior to ATM 200 authentication, the customer may first authenticate himself prior to the contactless connection being established. For instance, the customer may input authentication information on his external apparatus 120 and such transfer such data to the ATM 200 upon establishing the contactless connection, see [0084-0085], and [0063])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include authenticating further includes interacting with the user and using a code automatically transmitted from the mobile device of the user to authenticate the user, as taught by Gill, where this would be performed in order to reduce security issues. See Gill [0003].
Regarding claim 24. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 23, wherein
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “interacting further includes automatically communicating with the mobile device via one of: Near Field Communication, a wireless transmission, or Wi-Fi”. However, Gill teaches:
interacting further includes automatically communicating with the mobile device via one of: Near Field Communication, a wireless transmission, or Wi-Fi. (Gill teaches a mobile device 500 that may be configured to make a contactless transaction at the ATM 200. A “mobile device” 500 may be any mobile communication device, such as a cellular telecommunications device, see [0063], and information can be communicated wirelessly between the external apparatus and the ATM using short range wireless transmission technology, such near-field communication (NFC) technology, radio-frequency (RF) technology, or the like, see [0032], [0085])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include interacting further includes automatically communicating with the mobile device via one of: Near Field Communication, a wireless transmission, or Wi-Fi, as taught by Gill, where this would be performed in order to reduce security issues. See Gill [0003].
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick (US20110251910A1, hereinafter “Dimmick”).
Regarding claim 27. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21, wherein
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “causing further includes instructing a proxy agent on a remote server to send the link to the mobile device”. However, Dimmick teaches:
causing further includes instructing a proxy agent on a remote server (Dimmick teaches a backend transaction details server communicates with the sales terminal and includes an SMS generator (i.e., the claimed proxy agent)) to send the link to the mobile device. (Dimmick teaches SMS/MMS message may be sent to a phone number associated with the consumer's mobile device. The SMS/MMS message may be generated by an SMS (or MMS) generator 750 and an identifier for the transaction details is encoded in a text message, see [0140], transaction details identifier could be a web link, see [0096])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include causing further includes instructing a proxy agent on a remote server to send the link to the mobile device, as taught by Dimmick, where this would be performed in order to reduce any fraud because the payment instrument must be presented to the merchant for processing and may become compromised. See Dimmick [0006].
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick furthermore in view of Ilkin et al. (US20080306759A1, hereinafter “Ilkin”).
Regarding claim 28. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick disclose the method of claim 27, wherein instructing further includes
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “informing the proxy agent on a manner in which the link is to be sent to the mobile device based on a preference associated with the user”. However, Ilkin teaches:
informing the proxy agent on a manner in which the link is to be sent to the mobile device based on a preference associated with the user. (Ilkin teaches the kiosk transmits notification configuration message 148 to the PWM system, including the selected notification mechanism (i.e., the claimed preference), see [0030], and further teaches that the system includes an application server and notification engine connected to the kiosk through a network, see [0025-0026])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include informing the proxy agent on a manner in which the link is to be sent to the mobile device based on a preference associated with the user, as taught by Ilkin, where this would be performed in order to determine to whom notifications are sent and in what medium. See Ilkin [0021].
Regarding claim 29. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick disclose the method of claim 28, wherein
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Dimmick substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “the preference is obtained from a profile of the user and the preference indicates that the link is to be sent to the user in a text, an email, or a message to an application”. However, Ilkin teaches:
the preference is obtained from a profile of the user (Ilkin teaches registration information includes the user’s name and selected notification method and is saved in memory/database 144, see [0063-0064], [0066]) and the preference indicates that the link is to be sent to the user in a text, an email, or a message to an application. (Ilkin teaches the kiosk transmits notification configuration message 148 to the PWM system, including the selected notification mechanism (i.e., the claimed , see [0030], and further teaches that the system includes an application server and notification engine connected to the kiosk through a network, see [0025-0026], for example, email, short messaging service (SMS), multimedia messaging service (MM), paging signals, cellular or plain old telephone analog signals (e.g., landline and/or wireless telephones), and the like, see [0027] and [0066])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include the preference is obtained from a profile of the user and the preference indicates that the link is to be sent to the user in a text, an email, or a message to an application, as taught by Ilkin, where this would be performed in order to determine to whom notifications are sent and in what medium. See Ilkin [0021].
Claims 30-31 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Courtright (US8083141B1, hereinafter “Courtright”).
Regarding claim 30. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the method of claim 21 further comprising,
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “processing the method within a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) that is the kiosk”. However, Courtright teaches:
processing the method within a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) that is the kiosk. (Courtright teaches atm/POS device 105 may be configured as “headless” device (i.e., no display). The ATM/POS 105 may include a CPU to control transaction devices, a magnetic and/or chip card reader to identify the customer, see col. 2-lines 59-62)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include processing the method within a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) that is the kiosk, as taught by Courtright, where this would be performed in order to reduce annual cost associated with maintaining an ATM. See Courtright, col. 1-lines 16-17.
Regarding claim 31. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres further in view of Courtright disclose the method of claim 30 further comprising, providing, via the link, interactive teller assistance to the user on the mobile device. (Calman discloses the ATM sends a URL to the mobile device that provides access to financial institution assistive, including live video/audio chat and answers to questions concerning the financial truncation, see [0061], [0064])
Regarding claim 40. The combination of Calman in view of Kobres disclose the system of claim 39, wherein and the interface is for remote interactive teller assistance provided on the mobile device to the user during the transaction. (Calman discloses the ATM sends a URL to the mobile device that provides access to financial institution assistive, including live video/audio chat and answers to questions concerning the financial truncation, see [0061], [0064])
The combination of Calman in view of Kobres substantially discloses the claimed invention; however, the combination fails to explicitly disclose the “the kiosk is a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM)”. However, Courtright teaches:
the kiosk is a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM) (Courtright teaches atm/POS device 105 may be configured as “headless” device (i.e., no display). The ATM/POS 105 may include a CPU to control transaction devices, a magnetic and/or chip card reader to identify the customer, see col. 2-lines 59-62)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Calman to include the kiosk is a headless Automated Teller Machine (ATM), as taught by Courtright, where this would be performed in order to reduce annual cost associated with maintaining an ATM. See Courtright, col. 1-lines 16-17.
Conclusion
1. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVIA SALMAN whose telephone number is (313)446-4901. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
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, FAHD OBEID can be reached at (571) 270-3324. 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.
/AVIA SALMAN/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
