DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/907,528 has a total of 39 claims pending in the application; there are 3 independent claim and 36 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
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 CONCERNING DRAWINGS
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 900 in FIG. 15. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
INFORMATION CONCERNING THE SPECIFICATION
Specification
The applicant’s specification submitted is acceptable for examination purposes.
REJECTIONS BASED ON PRIOR ART
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 12, 15-17, 20, 22-27, 29, 32, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (Publication Number US 2010/0100652 A1).
As per claim 1, Lin et al. discloses “A computing system comprising: a plurality of hosts (one or more user consoles 14 and multiple computers 16 are connected to the KVM switch 12; Paragraph 0022; FIG. 1).” Lin et al. discloses “a console comprising at least a first keyboard, a first mouse and a first display (display device and one or more user input devices (e.g. a keyboard and mouse); Paragraph 0022).” Lin et al. discloses “a secure peripheral sharing device (the KVM switch [Paragraph 0022], which is known in the art for providing connections from one set of peripherals to a particular computer).” Lin et al. discloses “and a remote console subsystem comprising at least a second keyboard, a second mouse and a second display (see the process of desktop sharing (indicating display at more than one location) and remote control relationship between two computers connected to the KVM switch 12; Paragraph 0025), wherein the secure peripheral sharing device is configured to be connected to the console and the plurality of hosts, the peripheral sharing device is configured to be coupled to the remote console subsystem that is located away from the peripheral sharing device (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), and wherein the secure peripheral sharing device is configured to connect or couple between either the console or the remote console subsystem and an active host of the plurality of hosts (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), and wherein the peripheral sharing device is configured to switch any one of the plurality of host to become the active host (the KVM switch 12, the server computer PC2 and the client computer PC1 cooperate with each other so that video data representing desktop images and audio data are transmitted from the server to the client via the KVM switch; Paragraphs 0023-0024), and wherein a video stream from the active host is transferred to either the first display or the second display, and a keyboard and mouse data is transferred to the active host from either the first keyboard and the first mouse or the second keyboard and the second mouse (Paragraphs 0023-0024).”
As per claim 2, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the secure peripheral device is a secure KVM switch (the KVM switch [Paragraph 0022], which is known in the art for providing connections from one set of peripherals to a particular computer).”
As per claim 3, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein at least one peripheral device in the console or the remote console is shared using simultaneous use operation (the first computer may simultaneously have a desktop sharing and remote control relationship with more than one second computer. In such a situation, the DMA logic 24 of the KVM switch 12 transfers the video data from all second computers (via the respective USB controllers) to the USB controller for the first computer; Paragraph 0037).”
As per claims 4 and 23, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein at least one peripheral device in the console or the remote console is at least on of or any combination of: a biometric sensor, an identification device, a printer, an audio device, a camera, an external mass storage device, a USB dongle, a phone, and a smartphone (audio speakers [Paragraph 0005] and disk drives [Paragraph 0047]).”
As per claims 5 and 24, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the connection between the secure peripheral sharing device and the console, and the connection between the remote console subsystem and the remote console is provided by peripheral devices communication protocols, and peripheral devices communication protocols comprises at least one of or any combination of: USB, SPI, I2C, SCSI, FC, IDE, ATA, Firewire, Ethernet, Thunderbolt, InfiniBand, VGA, DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and Zigbee (although USB is used in the above descriptions as the interface and communication protocol between the server, the connecting device and the client, the invention may be implemented using other standard interfaces and communication protocols, such as Firewire.RTM., etc., including those that may come into existence in the future; Paragraph 0050).”
As per claims 6 and 25, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the coupling between the secure peripheral sharing device and the remote console subsystem is provided by remote console communication protocols, and the remote console communication protocols comprises at least one of or any combination of: Ethernet, SDH, SONET, OTN, FC, InfiniBand, USB, Firewire, Thunderbolt, GSM, CDMA, LTE, 3G, 4G, 5G, TCP/IP, UDP, FTP, HTTP, and SNMP (via a network using an appropriate network protocol [Paragraph 0051]. See also the presence of USB and Firewire in [Paragraph 0050]).”
As per claims 7 and 26, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 6 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the remote console communication protocol transfers video stream, the keyboard and mouse data, and active host selection commands (as it pertains to video signals and KB/MS signals (steps S33, S37b, and S39), and desktop sharing and remote control functions (steps S36a and S36b, S37a, and S38; FIG. 3).”
As per claims 8 and 27, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 6 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the remote console communication protocol further transfers: additional video streams, session control and authentication data, and data of additional peripheral devices (as it pertains to video signals and KB/MS signals (steps S33, S37b, and S39), and desktop sharing and remote control functions (steps S36a and S36b, S37a, and S38; FIG. 3).”
As per claim 12, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the secure peripheral sharing device communicates with the remote console subsystem using at least one of: (a) Ethernet modem, (b) Wi-Fi modem, and (c) 5G cellular modem (via a network using an appropriate network protocol [Paragraph 0051]. See also the presence of USB and Firewire in [Paragraph 0050]).”
As per claim 15, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the remote console subsystem comprises at least one of: (a) desktop computer, (b) laptop computer, (c) notebook computer, (d) tablet, (e) PDA, (f) smartphone, and (g) thick, thin or zero client (see example of a client’s desktop [Paragraph 0031] and PC3 as a server [Paragraph 0043]).”
As per claim 16, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the remote console subsystem comprises front panel or auxiliary front panel to receive active host selection commands from these panels (connections to PC 16 through the USB hub within the KVM switch 12; FIG. 2).”
As per claims 17 and 29, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises of ordinary secure KVM switch (KVM switch 12; FIG. 1) and auxiliary remote console adapter (as demonstrated through transmission D2 from PC1 to PC2 [FIG. 1] and remote control relationship; Paragraph 0027).”
As per claim 20, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the secure peripheral sharing device is configured to receive enable remote console operation mode from control center (as it pertains to video signals and KB/MS signals (steps S33, S37b, and S39), and desktop sharing and remote control functions (steps S36a and S36b, S37a, and S38; FIG. 3).”
As per claim 22, Lin et al. discloses “A secure peripheral sharing device comprising: a plurality of ports to be configured to be connected to a plurality of hosts (one or more user consoles 14 and multiple computers 16 are connected to the KVM switch 12; Paragraph 0022; FIG. 1).” Lin et al. discloses “and a port to be configured to be connected to a console comprising at least a first keyboard, a first mouse and a first display (display device and one or more user input devices (e.g. a keyboard and mouse); Paragraph 0022).” Lin et al. discloses “and a remote console port configured to be coupled to a remote console subsystem comprising at least a second keyboard, a second mouse and a second display (see the process of desktop sharing (indicating display at more than one location) and remote control relationship between two computers connected to the KVM switch 12; Paragraph 0025), wherein the remote console subsystem is located away from the peripheral sharing device (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), and wherein the peripheral sharing device is configured to connect or couple between either the console or the remote console subsystem and an active host of the plurality of hosts (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), and wherein the peripheral sharing device is configured to switch between any one of the plurality of hosts to become the active host (the KVM switch 12, the server computer PC2 and the client computer PC1 cooperate with each other so that video data representing desktop images and audio data are transmitted from the server to the client via the KVM switch; Paragraphs 0023-0024).”
As per claim 32, Lin et al. discloses “A remote console subsystem comprising: a port configured to be coupled to a secure peripheral sharing device (the KVM switch [Paragraph 0022], which is known in the art for providing connections from one set of peripherals to a particular computer).” Lin et al. discloses “and a remote console, wherein, the secure peripheral sharing device is configured to be connected to a plurality of hosts, and to a console comprising at least a first keyboard, a first mouse and a first display (display device and one or more user input devices (e.g. a keyboard and mouse); Paragraph 0022), the remote console comprising at least a second keyboard, a second mouse and a second display (see the process of desktop sharing (indicating display at more than one location) and remote control relationship between two computers connected to the KVM switch 12; Paragraph 0025), the remote console subsystem is located away from the peripheral sharing device (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), the peripheral sharing device is configured to connect or couple between either the console or the remote console and an active host of the plurality of hosts (KVM switch 12 to the console 14 and PCs 16; FIG. 1 and 2), and condition upon a switching command from the remote console subsystem, the peripheral sharing device is configured to switch any one of the plurality of hosts to become the active host (the KVM switch 12, the server computer PC2 and the client computer PC1 cooperate with each other so that video data representing desktop images and audio data are transmitted from the server to the client via the KVM switch; Paragraphs 0023-0024).”
As per claim 38, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above), wherein the remote console subsystem comprises front panel or auxiliary front panel to receive active host selection commands from these panels (connections to PC 16 through the USB hub within the KVM switch 12; FIG. 2).”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 9-11, 18-19, 28, 30, 33-34, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (Publication Number US 2010/0100652 A1) in view of Sundaravel (Patent Number US 8,473,651 B1).
As per claim 9, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above). However, Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose encryption as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the communication between the remote console subsystem and the secure peripheral sharing device is encrypted.”
Sundaravel discloses encryption as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the communication between the remote console subsystem and the secure peripheral sharing device is encrypted (Column 7, lines 18-36).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claims 10 and 28, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises a security unit that perform at least one or any combination of (a) encrypt data sent to the remote console subsystem, (b) decrypt data received from the remote console subsystem, and (c) authenticate the remote console subsystem.”
Sundaravel discloses “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises a security unit that perform at least one or any combination of (a) encrypt data sent to the remote console subsystem, (b) decrypt data received from the remote console subsystem, and (c) authenticate the remote console subsystem (encryption [Column 7, lines 18-36] and authentication [Column 6, lines 52-65]).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claims 11 and 34, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein an authentication procedure is performed between secure peripheral sharing device and remote console subsystem, and the authentication procedure comprises at least one of or any combination of: (a) Hardware ID authentication, (b) biometric authentication, (c) smart card authentication, (d) password authentication, (e) one time password authentication, and (f) multi-factor authentication.”
Sundaravel discloses “wherein an authentication procedure is performed between secure peripheral sharing device and remote console subsystem, and the authentication procedure comprises at least one of or any combination of: (a) Hardware ID authentication, (b) biometric authentication, (c) smart card authentication, (d) password authentication, (e) one time password authentication, and (f) multi-factor authentication (passwords [Column 1, lines 46-48] and multi-factor authentication [Column 6, lines 52-60]).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claims 18 and 30, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose form factors as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises of basic secure KVM switch and add-on adapter, wherein matching form-factor between basic secure KVM switch and add-on adapter is extension form-factor or bay form-factor.”
Sundaravel discloses form factors as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises of basic secure KVM switch and add-on adapter, wherein matching form-factor between basic secure KVM switch and add-on adapter is extension form-factor or bay form-factor (as example is a computer case; Claim 12).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claim 19, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device or the remote console subsystem comprises anti-tampering circuitries.”
Sundaravel discloses “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device or the remote console subsystem comprises anti-tampering circuitries (Column 6, lines 27-38).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claim 33, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises a security unit that perform at least one or any combination of (a) encrypt data sent from the remote console subsystem, (b) decrypt data received to the remote console subsystem, and (c) authenticate the secure peripheral sharing device.”
Sundaravel discloses “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises a security unit that perform at least one or any combination of (a) encrypt data sent from the remote console subsystem, (b) decrypt data received to the remote console subsystem, and (c) authenticate the secure peripheral sharing device (encryption [Column 7, lines 18-36] and authentication [Column 6, lines 52-65]).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
As per claim 37, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose the form factor as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises at least one of: (a) a desktop computer, (b) a laptop computer, (c) a notebook computer, (d) a tablet, (e) a PDA, (f) a smartphone, and (g) a thick, a thin or a zero client.”
Sundaravel discloses “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises at least one of: (a) a desktop computer, (b) a laptop computer, (c) a notebook computer, (d) a tablet, (e) a PDA, (f) a smartphone, and (g) a thick, a thin or a zero client (as example is a computer case; Claim 12).”
Lin et al. and Sundaravel are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Sundaravel to mitigate vulnerabilities in remote access [Column 1, lines 43-62].
Claims 13-14, 21, 31, 35, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (Publication Number US 2010/0100652 A1) in view of Holovacs (Publication Number US 2006/0107061 A1).
As per claim 13, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein the paths between peripheral devices and hosts in the system comprises device emulators and host emulators.”
Holovacs discloses “wherein the paths between peripheral devices and hosts in the system comprises device emulators and host emulators (Paragraphs 0057, 0078, 0086, and 0091).”
Lin et al. and Holovacs are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Holovacs to aid in managing remote systems [Paragraph 0016].
As per claim 14, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein the video processing between hosts and displays comprises at least one of or any combination of: (a) compression, (b) decompression, (c) packetizing, (d) video format conversion, and (e) display EDID emulation.”
Holovacs discloses “wherein the video processing between hosts and displays comprises at least one of or any combination of: (a) compression, (b) decompression, (c) packetizing, (d) video format conversion, and (e) display EDID emulation (compression [Paragraph 0008] and emulation [Paragraphs 0057, 0078, 0086, and 0091]).”
Lin et al. and Holovacs are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Holovacs to aid in managing remote systems [Paragraph 0016].
As per claims 21 and 31, Lin et al. discloses “The computing system of claim 1 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” While Lin et al. discloses a network [Paragraph 0051], Lin et al. does not disclose the Ethernet protocol as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises Ethernet switch to aggregate communication from first Ethernet port and remote console communication to a second Ethernet port.”
Holovacs discloses the Ethernet protocol as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the secure peripheral sharing device comprises Ethernet switch to aggregate communication from first Ethernet port and remote console communication to a second Ethernet port (Paragraph 0111).”
Lin et al. and Holovacs are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Holovacs to aid in managing remote systems [Paragraph 0016].
As per claim 35, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” While Lin et al. discloses a network [Paragraph 0051], Lin et al. does not disclose the Ethernet protocol as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the remote console subsystem communicates with the secure peripheral sharing device using at least one of: (a) Ethernet modem, (b) Wi-Fi modem, and (c) 5G cellular modem.”
Holovacs discloses the Ethernet protocol as disclosed in the limitation “wherein the remote console subsystem communicates with the secure peripheral sharing device using at least one of: (a) Ethernet modem, (b) Wi-Fi modem, and (c) 5G cellular modem (Paragraph 0111).”
Lin et al. and Holovacs are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Holovacs to aid in managing remote systems [Paragraph 0016].
As per claim 36, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein remote console subsystem comprises host emulators configured to communicate with device emulators for any one of the peripheral devices of the remote console subsystem.”
Holovacs discloses “wherein remote console subsystem comprises host emulators configured to communicate with device emulators for any one of the peripheral devices of the remote console subsystem (Paragraphs 0057, 0078, 0086, and 0091).”
Lin et al. and Holovacs are analogous art in that they in the field of KVM switches.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Holovacs to aid in managing remote systems [Paragraph 0016].
Claims 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (Publication Number US 2010/0100652 A1) in view of Bernardi (Patent Number US 12,003,660 B2).
As per claim 39, Lin et al. discloses “The remote console subsystem of claim 32 (as disclosed by Lin et al. above).” However, Lin et al. does not disclose “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises a smartphone and remote console accessory.”
Bernardi discloses “wherein the remote console subsystem comprises a smartphone and remote console accessory (mobile phones connecting to gateways; Column 25, lines 62-67).”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Lin et al. and Bernardi to reduce the cost of acquiring external gateways [Column 25, lines 65-67].
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF REFERENCES CITED BY APPLICANT
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(c), the applicant's submission of the Information Disclosure Statement dated November 11, 2024, is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609 C(2), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the instant office action.
RELEVENT ART CITED BY THE EXAMINER
The following prior art made of record and relied upon is citied to establish the level of skill in the applicant’s art and those arts considered reasonably pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See MPEP 707.05(c).
The following references teach networking with a KVM switch.
U.S. PATENT NUMBERS:2012/0179916 A1 – [Paragraphs 0401, 0412, and 0532]
2020/0057508 A1 – [Abstract; Paragraph 0001]
2022/0035458 A1 – [Paragraph 0002-0003]
CLOSING COMMENTS
Conclusion
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Henry Yu whose telephone number is (571)272-9779. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, IDRISS ALROBAYE can be reached at (571) 270-1023. 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.
/H.W.Y/Examiner, Art Unit 2181 December 19, 2025
/IDRISS N ALROBAYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2181