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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/26/2024 and 05/07/2025 was filed before the mailing of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1-14 recite a method (i.e. process), claims 15-17 recite a device (i.e. machine), and claims 18-20 recite non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (i.e. machine or article of manufacture). Therefore claims 1-20 fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Independent claims 1, 15, and 18 recite the limitations displaying description information of a [first application] and an application recommendation list of the [first application], wherein the description information of the [first application] comprises an image and a text that are related to the [first application], and the application recommendation list of the [first application] comprises an identification of a [second application] related to the [first application]; receiving a first operation for the [second application] in the application recommendation list of the [first application]; and displaying a first image on the [first interface] in response to the first operation, wherein the first image is an image that is related to the [second application] and that is in description information of the [second application], the description information of the [second application] comprises an image and a text that are related to the [second application], and the first image is determined based on the description information of the [second application] and the description information of the [first application]. The claimed invention is drawn towards a method of recommending apps to users, and the above-mentioned claim limitations correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal interactions, i.e., recommending apps that a user may be interested in in order to download, etc.), as evidenced by the limitations detailing displaying description information of a [first application] and an application recommendation list of the [first application], and the application recommendation list of the [first application] comprises an identification of a [second application] related to the [first application]; receiving a first operation for the [second application] in the application recommendation list of the [first application]; and displaying a first image on the [first interface] in response to the first operation, wherein the first image is an image that is related to the [second application] and that is in description information of the [second application]. The claim limitations also correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), as evidenced by the limitations describing the observation and evaluation of data and making a judgment or opinion based on the observed and evaluated data. The claims recite an abstract idea.
Note: the features or elements in brackets in the above Step 2A Prong One section are inserted for reading clarity, but are analyzed as “additional elements” under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application simply because the claims recite the additional elements of: an electronic device, a first interface, a first and second application, the electronic device comprising a memory and processor (claim 15), and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instruction run on the electronic device (claim 18). The additional elements are computer components recited at a high-level of generality performing the above-mentioned limitations. The combination of the additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do 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 elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 7 recites the limitations displaying description information of a [third application] and an application recommendation list of the [third application], wherein the description information of the [third application] comprises an image and a text that are related to the [third application], and the application recommendation list of the [third application] comprises an identification of the [second application]; receiving a second operation for the [second application] in the application recommendation list of the [third application]; and displaying a second image on the [second interface] in response to the second operation, wherein the second image is an image that is related to the [second application] and that is in the description information of the [second application], the second image is determined based on the description information of the [second application] and the description information of the [third application], and the second image is different from the first image. The limitations are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claims also recite the additional elements of a third application, the second application, and the second interface. The additional elements amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 9 recites the limitations of displaying a [trigger control] on the [first interface] in response to the first operation, wherein the [trigger control] is configured to trigger installation or update of the [second application]; receiving a third operation for the [trigger control]; and installing or updating the [second application] in the [electronic device] in response to the third operation. The limitations are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claims also recite the additional elements of a trigger control on the first interface, and a second application in the electronic device. The additional elements amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 11 recites the limitations of displaying the first image on the first interface in response to the first operation comprises: sending a first request to a [server] in response to the first operation; receiving a first response from [the server], wherein the first response carries the first image; and displaying the first image in a partial area on the [first interface]. The limitations are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claims also recite the additional elements of a server and the first interface. The additional elements amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 12 recites the limitations of receiving a fourth operation in the first image; and displaying, on a [third interface] in response to the fourth operation, the description information of the [second application] and an application recommendation list of the [second application]. The limitations are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claims also recite the additional elements of a third interface and the second application. The additional elements amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 13 recites the limitations of receiving a fifth operation for the [second application] in the application recommendation list of the [first application], wherein the fifth operation is different from the first operation; and displaying, on a [fifth interface] in response to the fifth operation, the description information of the [second application] and an application recommendation list of the [second application]. The limitations are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claims also recite the additional elements of the first application, a fifth interface, and the second application. The additional elements amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 20 recite additional limitations that are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed in the rejected claims above. The claims also recite additional elements that have been analyzed in the rejected claims above. Thus, claims 2-6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9, 10, 14, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil (2016/0092768) in view of Nagasaka (2010/0146442).
Claim 1: A method, applied to an electronic device, the method comprising:
Regarding the following limitation:
displaying, on a first interface, description information of a first application and an application recommendation list of the first application, wherein the description information of the first application comprises an image and a text that are related to the first application, and the application recommendation list of the first application comprises an identification of a second application related to the first application;
Patil discloses displaying description information of a first application wherein the description information of the first application comprises an image and a text that are related to the first application, and the application recommendation list of the first application comprises an identification of a second application related to the first application: (Patil ¶0049 the recommendation system 108 may receive a set of application identifiers that identify applications that have been installed on a user device; ¶0052 user may allow an application on the user device to provide a set of application identifiers to the recommendation system; ¶0053 prior to the set of application identifiers being provided to the recommendation system, the user may review the set of application identifiers and make additions (e.g., adding one or more new application identifiers) and/or deletions (e.g., removing one or more application identifiers from the set); user device may present a user interface including a list of application identifiers; user may check or otherwise select the application identifiers from the list to provide to the recommendation system the first set of application identifiers; ¶0055 set of application identifiers may identify applications that are currently installed and/or downloaded; ¶0056 recommendation system may identify other sets of application identifiers of one or more other users based on similarity to the requesting user devices' set of application identifiers; ¶0059 once similar sets of application identifiers have been identified, the recommendation system may identify one or more applications of potential interest by determining at least one application identifier in the other user's similar sets of application identifiers that are not in the requesting user device's set of application identifiers; ¶0060 the recommendation system may provide a recommendation to the user and/or user device; the recommendation may include an application name that identifies an application of potential interest; the recommendation may include any number of application names that identify any number of applications of potential interest; ¶0027 results may include recommendations generated by the recommendation system; data may include application download addresses for downloading/previewing the app, text that describes the app, and images (e.g., icons and/or screenshots) for the application; see also Fig. 5); ¶0041 the GUI may display the search results to the user as a list of user selectable links including text and images; text and images associated with the links may include native application names, text describing one or more native applications associated with the application download addresses, and images associated with the native applications (e.g., application icons); ¶0084 disclosing installed applications 510 (i.e., native applications); and search results 512-1, 512-2… 512-4 includes an image (e.g., an application icon) and text (e.g., application name) of apps in the recommendation list to the first app that is the selected app (see 512-5 being the first app)). While strongly suggested, Patil does not explicitly or clearly disclose the first interface includes the application recommendation list of the first application comprises an identification of a second application related to the first application. Nagasaka suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Nagasaka Fig. 2 and ¶0067 upper portion of the display screen 150 is an area used by an application program which is currently being executed in the information processing apparatus; ¶0068 lower portion of the display screen 150 includes a left recommended-application list display area 152 and a right recommended-application list display area; the recommended-application list display areas 152 and 153 shows information on application programs relevant to an application program which is shown in the application execution area 151 as an application program currently being executed in the information processing apparatus). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to Patil to include the first interface includes the application recommendation list of the first application comprises an identification of a second application related to the first application as taught by Nagasaka since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately; one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Patil as modified above discloses the following:
receiving a first operation for the second application in the application recommendation list of the first application; and (Patil ¶0087 disclosing the list results, and when the user selects a link, the user device 502 downloads and/or previews the associated application; when the user selects the link the user device may activate a browser or other application to access information (e.g., a Web page) about a native application associated with the application download address)
displaying a first image on the first interface in response to the first operation, wherein the first image is an image that is related to the second application and that is in description information of the second application, the description information of the second application comprises an image and a text that are related to the second application, and the first image is determined based on the description information of the second application and the description information of the first application. (Patil ¶0027 results may include recommendations generated by the recommendation system; data may include application download addresses for downloading/previewing the app, text that describes the app, and images (e.g., icons and/or screenshots) for the application; see also Fig. 5); ¶0041 the GUI may display the search results to the user as a list of user selectable links including text and images; text and images associated with the links may include native application names, text describing one or more native applications associated with the application download addresses, and images associated with the native applications (e.g., application icons); ¶0084 disclosing installed applications 510 (i.e., native applications); and search results 512-1, 512-2… 512-4 includes an image (e.g., an application icon) and text (e.g., application name) of apps in the recommendation list to the first app that is the selected app (see 512-5 being the first app); ¶0124 disclosing a cluster that may identify one or more categories that classify types of applications of an application set (e.g., a category cluster). In another example, the cluster may include one or more groups of users associated with applications identified in an application set (e.g., a group cluster). There may be clusters of any type; ¶0125 a category cluster identifies a set of applications that are related by one or more classifications(s). For example, a “news” profile may identify a “news” cluster which identifies a set of application identifiers related to news (e.g., CNN or the WALL STREET JOURNAL). A “gamer” profile may identify a “games” cluster which identifies a set of application identifiers related to games. There may be any number of category clusters; ¶0126 a recommendation request may request applications of potential interest related to a category. The similarity module 612 may receive and/or retrieve a requesting user's set of application identifiers based on information from the recommendation request (e.g., user identifier, user device 104-1 identifier, or any identifier) as discussed herein. The similarity module 612 may retrieve a cluster 904-1 based on the information from the recommendation request (e.g., a category cluster identifier that identifies a “sports” cluster). The cluster 904-1 may include, or be associated with, application set 906-1, which identifies applications related to sports)
Claims 15 and 18: Claims 15 and 18 are directed to a device and non-transitory computer-readable storage. Claims 15 and 18 recites limitations that are parallel in nature as those addressed above for claim 1, which is directed towards a method. Claims 15 and 18 is therefore rejected for the same reasons as set forth above for claim 1. Furthermore, claims 15 and 18 disclose:
(Claim 15): An electronic device, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor; wherein the at least one memory stores program instructions, and the at least one processor is configured to invoke the program instructions in the memory, to enable the electronic device to perform operations comprising: (Patil ¶0004 the at least one digital device is a mobile device; ¶0007 system including non-transitive memory comprising executable instructions; instructions may be executable by a data processing device; ¶0157 digital device includes a data processing device (e.g., a processor), a memory system (e.g., non-transitory memory))
(Claim 18): A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, comprising computer instructions, wherein when the computer instructions are run on an electronic device, the electronic device is enabled to perform operations comprising: (Patil ¶0004 the at least one digital device is a mobile device; ¶0007 system including non-transitive memory comprising executable instructions; instructions may be executable by a data processing device; ¶0157 digital device includes a data processing device (e.g., a processor), a memory system (e.g., non-transitory memory))
Claim 2: The method according to claim 1, wherein the first image being determined based on the description information of the second application and the description information of the first application comprises: the first image is an image that is related to the second application and that has a greatest difference from the image related to the first application. (Patil Fig. 5 disclosing the first app 512-5, and the list of other apps such as TripAdvisor (a second app) that is different from the first app Urbanspoon)
Claims 16 and 19: Claims 16 and 19 are directed to a device and non-transitory computer-readable storage. Claims 16 and 19 recites limitations that are parallel in nature as those addressed above for claim 2, which is directed towards a method. Claims 16 and 19 is therefore rejected for the same reasons as set forth above for claim 2.
Claim 3: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: displaying a first text on the first interface in response to the first operation, wherein the first text indicates a feature of the second application. (Patil ¶0087 disclosing the list results, and when the user selects a link, the user device 502 downloads and/or previews the associated application; when the user selects the link the user device may activate a browser or other application to access information (e.g., a Web page) about a native application associated with the application download address)
Claims 17 and 20: Claims 17 and 20 are directed to a device and non-transitory computer-readable storage. Claims 17 and 20 recites limitations that are parallel in nature as those addressed above for claim 3, which is directed towards a method. Claims 17 and 20 is therefore rejected for the same reasons as set forth above for claim 3.
Claim 4: The method according to claim 3, wherein the first text is placed in the first image. (Patil ¶0041 the search results may include a list of application download addresses (e.g., application download addresses such as a GOOGLE PLAY download address to download or preview an associated application) and/or link data. Link data may include text and/or images associated with different application download addresses in the list (See search results of FIG. 2). The search system may transmit the list of application download addresses to the user device along with additional data to be displayed in user selectable links. In some examples, the GUI may display the search results to the user as a list of user selectable links including text and images. The text and images associated with the links may include native application names, text describing one or more native applications associated with the application download addresses, and images associated with the native applications (e.g., application icons; ¶0087 each results include links 512-1, 512-2 . . . 512-4; Each of the links 512 include link data. For example, each of the links 512 includes an image (e.g., an application icon) and text (e.g., application name) that describes the native application . Each of the links 512 may be associated with an application download address such that when the user selects a link, the user device 502 downloads and/or previews the associated native application. In some embodiments, when the user selects the link the user device 502 may activate a browser or other application to access information (e.g., a Web page) about a native application associated with the application download address)
Claim 6: The method according to claim 3, wherein the first text comprises at least one of the following texts: a text provided by a developer of the second application, a text related to the second application, or a text in the image related to the second application. (Patil ¶0041 the search results may include a list of application download addresses (e.g., application download addresses such as a GOOGLE PLAY download address to download or preview an associated application) and/or link data. Link data may include text and/or images associated with different application download addresses in the list (See search results of FIG. 2). The search system may transmit the list of application download addresses to the user device along with additional data to be displayed in user selectable links. In some examples, the GUI may display the search results to the user as a list of user selectable links including text and images. The text and images associated with the links may include native application names, text describing one or more native applications associated with the application download addresses, and images associated with the native applications (e.g., application icons; ¶0087 search results include links 512-1, 512-2 . . . 512-4; Each of the links 512 include link data. For example, each of the links 512 includes an image (e.g., an application icon) and text (e.g., application name) that describes the native application . Each of the links 512 may be associated with an application download address such that when the user selects a link, the user device 502 downloads and/or previews the associated native application. In some embodiments, when the user selects the link the user device 502 may activate a browser or other application to access information (e.g., a Web page) about a native application associated with the application download address; ¶0072 example application record 310 for the application (e.g., game) named “ANGRY BIRDS.” The application record 310 includes the application name “ANGRY BIRDS” indicated at 312. The application record 310 includes an application identifier number indicated at 314. The application record 310 includes application attributes 316. The application attributes 316 include data fields for the name of the developer and the genre of the application. The developer of the application included in the application attributes 316 may be “ROVIO ENTERTAINMENT.” The genre of the application may be “games.” The application attributes 316 also includes fields for description and reviews. The description may include text that describes “ANGRY BIRDS.” In some examples, the description may be provided by the developer of the application. The field for reviews may include text from user reviews in some examples)
Claim 9: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: displaying a trigger control on the first interface in response to the first operation, wherein the trigger control is configured to trigger installation or update of the second application; receiving a third operation for the trigger control; and installing or updating the second application in the electronic device in response to the third operation. (Patil ¶0087 disclosing the list results, and when the user selects a link, the user device 502 downloads and/or previews the associated application; when the user selects the link the user device may activate a browser or other application to access information (e.g., a Web page) about a native application associated with the application download address; note the preview is one operation and the download/install is another (third) operation)
Claim 10: The method according to claim 9, wherein the trigger control is placed in the first image. (Patil Fig. 5 and ¶0087 and ¶0090 indicating the download or selectable link being displayed in the image)
Claim 14: The method according to claim 1, wherein the first interface is a user interface of an application market, and the first application or the second application is an application provided in the application market. (Patil Fig. 5 and ¶0086, ¶0090, ¶0125)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7, 8, and 11-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
No prior art is applied to the following claims:
Claim 5: The method according to claim 4, wherein an overlay location, a font color, and a font size of the first text are determined based on the first image.
Claim 7: The method according to claim 3, further comprising: displaying, on a second interface, description information of a third application and an application recommendation list of the third application, wherein the description information of the third application comprises an image and a text that are related to the third application, and the application recommendation list of the third application comprises an identification of the second application; receiving a second operation for the second application in the application recommendation list of the third application; and displaying a second image on the second interface in response to the second operation, wherein the second image is an image that is related to the second application and that is in the description information of the second application, the second image is determined based on the description information of the second application and the description information of the third application, and the second image is different from the first image.
Claim 8: The method according to claim 7, wherein the third application and the first application are of different types of applications.
Claim 11: The method according to claim 1, wherein displaying the first image on the first interface in response to the first operation comprises: sending a first request to a server in response to the first operation; receiving a first response from the server, wherein the first response carries the first image; and displaying the first image in a partial area on the first interface.
Claim 12: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving a fourth operation in the first image; and displaying, on a third interface in response to the fourth operation, the description information of the second application and an application recommendation list of the second application.
Claim 13: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving a fifth operation for the second application in the application recommendation list of the first application, wherein the fifth operation is different from the first operation; and displaying, on a fifth interface in response to the fifth operation, the description information of the second application and an application recommendation list of the second application.
The closest patent or patent application prior art reference found that is relevant to the applicant’s invention includes Patil (2016/0092768) and Nagasaka (2010/0146442). Patil discloses a similarity module that receives a first set of application identifiers identifying applications downloaded or installed on at least one digital device, compares the first set of application identifiers to a second set of application identifiers identifying applications of at least one other user, generates a similarity value based on the comparison, and when the similarity value exceeds a similarity threshold, determine that the first and second sets are sufficiently similar. If the first and second sets are sufficiently similar, the selection module may determine at least one application identifier in the second set that is not in the first set. A messaging module may provide a recommendation to the first user, the recommendation including the at least one application identifier in the second set that is not in the first set. Nagasaka discloses a control section configured to determine other application programs to be recommended in the course of execution of the application program in the application execution section. Information stored in the memory as the information relevant to the application program includes first relevant information and second relevant information which are used for determining the other application programs to be recommended in the course of execution of the application program in the application execution section. Neither reference appears to disclose the detailed limitations of the dependent claims. The claims appear to overcome the prior art.
The closest non-patent literature prior art reference found that is relevant to the applicant’s invention includes the publication “Automated Interestingness Calculator for mobile app recommendation” (Gupta, et. al, 2015) which generally discloses an Automated Interestingness Calculator (AIC) that provides users a list of interesting apps based on various Interestingness Measures (IMs) that quantify the interestingness of an association. The publication focuses on the importance of visual aesthetics in app interface designers and developers carefully choosing their design strategies for the app market, in order to develop recommendation systems for apps that are based on user search experience. The reference does not appear to disclose the detailed limitations of the dependent claims. The claims appear to overcome the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONE N SIMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m..
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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at (571) 270-1833. 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.
DIONE N. SIMPSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3628
/DIONE N. SIMPSON/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights