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 .
Response to Arguments
The reply filed on June 18, 2026 is not fully responsive to the prior Office action because of the following omission:
A complete response to the nonstatutory double patenting rejections.
Applicant is required to provide:
a reply showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference claims, or
the filing of a terminal disclaimer in accordance with 37 CFR 1.321 in the pending application(s) with a reply to the Office action (see MPEP § 1490 for a discussion of terminal disclaimers). See MPEP 804 I.B. 1.
Since Applicant appears to attempt to submit a bona fide reply, Examiner will examine the reply on the merits. Applicant is advised to submit future responses in accordance to MPEP 714.03.
On page 10 of the reply filed on June 18, 2026, applicant asserts Branson discloses a method for synchronizing the content of the e-book reader, but does not disclose how to select a device to be synchronized with the virtual world.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s interpretation of the prior art and its application to current claims. Branson discloses receiving a request to create a virtual item based on a real-world item.1 The reception of the request identifies the real-world item. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the request discloses the selection of a device to be synchronized.
Applicant’s amendments further require the “display device connected to the user terminal device through same access point”. Branson fig.1A discloses a display device [item 120] and a terminal device [item 120] connected via a network [item 120]. Paragraph 0019 discloses the network is a LAN. It is well known in the art before the effective filing date the ordinary structure of a LAN consist of a plurality of network devices connected to router [access point] via a wired or wireless connections.2 Therefore, Branson discloses a shared access point between the terminal and display device. Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive and new rejections are made in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667.
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.
Present Application
Patent 12,166,807
Claim 1
A server comprising:
a communication interface; and a processor configured to:
render a virtual world image including an avatar corresponding to a user, transmit the virtual world image to a user terminal device through the communication interface,
based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a first user command to add a virtual display device to the virtual world image,
render the virtual world image on which content displayed on the display device is displayed through the virtual display device, and
stop the rendering of the virtual world image based on determining that the user terminal device is not in use by the user.
Claim 10
A server comprising:
a communication interface; and a processor configured to:
render a virtual world image including an avatar corresponding to a user, transmit the virtual world image to a user terminal device through the communication interface,
based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a first user command to add a virtual display device to the virtual world image,
render the virtual world image on which content displayed on a display device corresponding to the virtual display device is displayed through the virtual display device,
Claim 16
stop the rendering of the virtual world image based on determining that the user terminal device is not in use by the user.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 11-14 and 18-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 16 of U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claims 1 and 12,
Although U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
identify a display device connected to the user terminal device through same access point.
In an analogous art, Branson discloses
identify a display device connected to the user terminal device through same access point.(Fig. 3- item 322- request identifies a real-world device para 0025- the real-world device is an eBook with a display. Fig. 1A discloses a LAN network that connects the terminal device and display device)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to combine the LAN network structure of Branson with No.12,166,807 to produce the predictable result of synchronizing experiences between a physical device and virtual device.
Claims 2 and 13,
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a second user command of the avatar in relation to the virtual display device, control an operation of the virtual display device and transmit a control command corresponding to the second user command to the display device through the communication interface, based on the second user command. (Branson para 0030-the second user controls the avatar and virtual book and the commands performed on the virtual book alter the display on the ebook reader.)
Claims 3 and 14,
The server of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to, based on an operation of the display device being changed and receiving information about the changed operation from the display device through the communication interface, render the virtual world image based on the information about the changed operation. (Branson para 0054- For example, in an embodiment where the digital item 132 represents a home video stored as a digital movie file, exemplary state changes may include the user beginning playback of the movie, stopping playback of the movie, skipping ahead in the playback, etc. Once the state changes, the virtual world client 130 synchronizes the change with the associated virtual object 170 on the virtual world system 160. The virtual world application server 168 then modifies the state of the virtual object 170 accordingly.)
Claims 7 and 18,
The server of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to, based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a fourth user command to change a content playback mode between the user terminal device and the display device (Branson para 0029- the user retrieve a loaned book which is mapped to changing a playback mode), render the virtual world image, based on a usage state of the user terminal device (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization).
Claims 8 and 19,
The server of claim 7, wherein the processor is further configured to: render the virtual world image and provide the rendered virtual world image to the user terminal device through the communication interface based on determining that the user terminal device is in use by the user. (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization)
Claims 9 and 20,
The server of claim 8, wherein the processor is further configured to: receive identification information and a playback position of the content based on determining that the user terminal device is in use by the user in a state in which the rendering of the virtual world image is stopped; and reproduce the content starting from the playback position, based on the identification information. (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization,).
Claim 11,
The server of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: receive, from another server through the communication interface, information about the virtual display device on which the content is displayed; and render the virtual world image including the virtual display device, based on the received information. The client device of the second user is mapped to the server. In every communication, the roles of client/server switch depending on the origin of the data transmitted. Branson para 0025 – a client device . Fig. 2b- i/o devices for controls of avatar, para 0028- disclose sharing content with a plurality of users, para 0039- discloses enabling a second user to control the shared content on a virtual display, para 0040- second user controls the page displayed on the virtual device)
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 17-19 of U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 (IDS filed November 6, 2044) in view of Jover U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0103104 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claims 4 and 15,
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on the first user command, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device (Branson fig. 5A-5B-discloses a commands are synchronized between a physical object and a virtual object. An association between the objects is disclosed.).
Although U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on authentication information being received from the user terminal device through the communication interface, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device, based on the authentication information.
In an analogous art, Jover discloses
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on authentication information, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device, based on the authentication information. (fig. 4- discloses an authentication process between a device and display to establish a communication session)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the communication session of Jover with the U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson system to produce the predictable result of associating physical displays and virtual displays based on an authentication process.
Claim 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 (IDS filed November 6, 2044) in view of Oya U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0379591 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claims 5 and 16,
based on receiving a third user command to display other content from the user terminal device through the communication interface (Branson para 0059- Request is made to turn page on virtual eBook. The next page is other content.),
render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device (Branson Fig. 5B- item 562- synchronize changes between the real world client and the virtual world), and
transmit a control signal for controlling the display device to display the other content to the display device through the communication interface (Branson Fig. 5B- synchronization); and
based on the third user command from the user terminal device through the communication interface, render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device. (Branson fig. 6)
Although Branson disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
based on receiving a command to stop sharing content through the communication interface, render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device.
In an analogous art, Oya discloses
Sending a command to stop sharing content ( fig.6, para 0050)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the screen sharing of controls of Oya with the U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson system to produce the predictable result of stopping the screen sharing between virtual and physical devices.
Claim 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Oya U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0379591 in view of Sharma et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2014/0280758.
Claims 6 and 17,
Although U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson/Oya disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on a notification message being displayed on the display device while the content is displayed on the display device and the other content is displayed on the virtual display device, render the virtual world image on which the other content is overlaid with the notification message is displayed through the virtual display device.
In an analogous art, Sharma discloses
A notification overlayed in a video stream (para 0071, fig. 8)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the notification of Sharma with the U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson/Oya to produce displaying a notification as an overlay within the virtual display. The synchronization of Branson would work in the manner to display the virtual content and the notification.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No.12,166,807 in view of Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Jeong et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication2019/00550063 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claim 10,
Although U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
based on receiving the identification information and the playback position, transmit a control signal for turning off the display device to the display device through the communication interface.
In an analogous art, Jeong discloses
based on receiving the identification information and the playback position, transmit a control signal for turning off the display device to the display device through the communication interface. (para 0098-0099-disclose a request to stop content and retrieving content information regarding the current place of content and place the device in standby mode.)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the stop request of Jeong with the U.S. Patent No.12,166,807/Branson to produce the predictable result of retrieving content information and turning the display device off. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the request of Jeong is the functional equivalent the claimed process. The teachings of Jeong perform the same functions in a different order with the same result.
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 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 1-3, 7-9, 11-14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 (IDS filed November 6, 2044) in view of Dolan et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2018/0150844.
Claims 1 and 12,
Branson discloses
A server comprising:
a communication interface (para 0033-virtual world client); and a processor (para 0034) configured to:
render a virtual world image including an avatar corresponding to a user (fig. 2c) ,
transmit the virtual world image to a user terminal device through the communication interface (para 0033-the virtual world client 130 may output a representation of the virtual world for display),
based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a first user command to add a virtual display device to the virtual world image (fig. 3), identify a display device connected to the user terminal device through same access point.(Fig. 3- item 322- request identifies a real-world device para 0025- the real-world device is an eBook with a display. Fig. 1A discloses a LAN network that connects the terminal device and display device)
render the virtual world image on which content displayed on a display device corresponding to the virtual display device is displayed through the virtual display device (fig.4- synchronize the virtual object state with Real world object state)
Although Branson disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
stop the rendering of the virtual world image based on determining that the user terminal device is not in use by the user.
In an analogous art, Dolan discloses
stop the rendering of the virtual world image based on determining that the user terminal device is not in use by the user. (para 0106-disclose augmented reality device terminating a display based on the lack of user action.)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to apply the detection of user presence to determine whether to stop a visual display with the Branson system to produce the predictable result of stopping a virtual display upon determining lack of user use. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to conserve resource and energy by only streaming a virtual display when a user is presence to view the displayed content.
Claims 2 and 13,
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a second user command of the avatar in relation to the virtual display device, control an operation of the virtual display device and transmit a control command corresponding to the second user command to the display device through the communication interface, based on the second user command. (Branson para 0030-the second user controls the avatar and virtual book and the commands performed on the virtual book alter the display on the ebook reader.)
Claims 3 and 14,
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on an operation of the display device being changed and receiving information about the changed operation from the display device through the communication interface, render the virtual world image based on the information about the changed operation. (Branson para 0054- For example, in an embodiment where the digital item 132 represents a home video stored as a digital movie file, exemplary state changes may include the user beginning playback of the movie, stopping playback of the movie, skipping ahead in the playback, etc. Once the state changes, the virtual world client 130 synchronizes the change with the associated virtual object 170 on the virtual world system 160. The virtual world application server 168 then modifies the state of the virtual object 170 accordingly.)
Claims 7 and 18,
based on receiving, from the user terminal device through the communication interface, a fourth user command to change a content playback mode between the user terminal device and the display device (Branson para 0029- the user retrieve a loaned book which is mapped to changing a playback mode) , render the virtual world image, based on a usage state of the user terminal device . (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization) .
Claims 8 and 19,
wherein the processor is further configured to: render the virtual world image and provide the rendered virtual world image to the user terminal device through the communication interface based on determining that the user terminal device is in use by the user. (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization)
Claim 9 and 20,
wherein the processor is further configured to: receive identification information and a playback position of the content based on determining that the user terminal device is in use by the user in a state in which the rendering of the virtual world image is stopped; and reproduce the content starting from the playback position, based on the identification information (Branson Para 0029-0030- upon opening the book in the e-reader, the virtual device image would be rendered based on the image at the e-reader through synchronization,).
Claim 11,
wherein the processor is further configured to: receive, from another server through the communication interface, information about the virtual display device on which the content is displayed; and render the virtual world image including the virtual display device, based on the received information. (The client device of the second user is mapped to the server. In every communication, the roles of client/server switch depending on the origin of the data transmitted. Branson para 0025 – a client device . Fig. 2b- i/o devices for controls of avatar, para 0028- disclose sharing content with a plurality of users, para 0039- discloses enabling a second user to control the shared content on a virtual display, para 0040- second user controls the page displayed on the virtual device).
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Dolan et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2018/0150844 in view of Jover U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0103104 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claims 4 and 15,
Branson/Dolan discloses
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on the first user command, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device (Branson fig. 5A-5B-discloses a commands are synchronized between a physical object and a virtual object. An association between the objects is disclosed.).
Although Branson/Dolan disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on authentication information being received from the user terminal device through the communication interface, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device, based on the authentication information.
In an analogous art, Jover discloses
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on authentication information, identify the display device corresponding to the virtual display device, based on the authentication information. (fig. 4- discloses an authentication process between a device and display to establish a communication session)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the communication session of Jover with the Branson system to produce the predictable result of associating physical displays and virtual displays based on an authentication process.
Claim 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Dolan et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2018/0150844 in view of Oya U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0379591 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claims 5 and 16,
based on receiving a third user command to display other content from the user terminal device through the communication interface (Branson para 0059- Request is made to turn page on virtual eBook. The next page is other content.),
render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device (Fig. 5B- item 562- synchronize changes between the real world client and the virtual world), and
transmit a control signal for controlling the display device to display the other content to the display device through the communication interface (Fig. 5B- synchronization); and
based on the third user command from the user terminal device through the communication interface, render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device. (fig. 6)
Although Branson disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
based on receiving a command to stop sharing content through the communication interface, render the virtual world image on which the other content is displayed through the virtual display device.
In an analogous art, Oya discloses
Sending a command to stop sharing content ( fig.6, para 0050)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the screen sharing of controls of Oya with the Branson system to produce the predictable result of stopping the screen sharing between virtual and physical devices.
Claim 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Dolan et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2018/0150844 in view of Oya U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0379591 in view of Sharma et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2014/0280758.
Claims 6 and 17,
Although Branson/Dolan/Oya disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to, based on a notification message being displayed on the display device while the content is displayed on the display device and the other content is displayed on the virtual display device, render the virtual world image on which the other content is overlaid with the notification message is displayed through the virtual display device.
In an analogous art, Sharma discloses
A notification overlayed in a video stream (para 0071, fig. 8)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the notification of Sharma with the Branson/Dolan/Oya to produce displaying a notification as an overlay within the virtual display. The synchronization of Branson would work in the manner to display the virtual content and the notification.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Branson et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0038667 in view of Dolan et al. U.S. Patent Application publication 2018/0150844 in view of Jeong et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication2019/00550063 (IDS filed November 6, 2044).
Claim 10,
Although Branson/Dolan disclose substantial limitations of the claimed invention, it fails to explicitly disclose
based on receiving the identification information and the playback position, transmit a control signal for turning off the display device to the display device through the communication interface.
In an analogous art, Jeong discloses
based on receiving the identification information and the playback position, transmit a control signal for turning off the display device to the display device through the communication interface. (para 0098-0099-disclose a request to stop content and retrieving content information regarding the current place of content and place the device in standby mode.)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to combine the stop request of Jeong with the Branson/Dolan to produce the predictable result of retrieving content information and turning the display device off. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the request of Jeong is the functional equivalent the claimed process. The teachings of Jeong perform the same functions in a different order with the same result.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M COUSINS whose telephone number is (571)270-7746. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am -5:00pm 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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached at (571) 272-4170. 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.
/JMC/Examiner, Art Unit 2459
/TONIA L DOLLINGER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2459
1 Branson U.S. Patent Application publication 2012/0038667-paragraph 0047
2 CloudFlare, pg. 1-2
Prosecution Insights