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 .
Detailed Action
This Non-Final Rejection Office Action is in response to Applicant’s filing of 11/22/2024.
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
The earliest effective filing date of the present application is 02/02/2020.
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 an abstract idea without significantly more.
At Step 1 of analysis, the instant claims are directed towards a system and a method. Thus, all claims fall within one of the four statutory categories and are considered eligible subject matter.
At Step 2A, Prong One, of analysis, the claims set forth a method for managing work units and records among users in a collaborative environment. A collaborative environment in which a user reviews content and inputs information indicating working on the content illustrates managing personal behavior or relationships, or interactions between people, which are included within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas.
Claim 11, which is illustrative of claim 1, contains those elements that define these abstract ideas, (and are highlighted below):
A method to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the method comprising:
storing, in non-transitory electronic storage, environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work, the first work unit record including a digital content item expected to be reviewed in order to complete the first unit of work;
establishing one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server;
effectuating communication of information from the server to the remotely located client computing platform over the one or more network connections to cause the remotely located client computing platform to present an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment, wherein the digital content item is made accessible through the user interface;
generating, at the server and responsive to obtaining user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the digital content item through the user interface presented at the remotely located client computing platform, a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a record hierarchy; and
effectuating storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage.
At Step 2A, Prong Two, of analysis, the Examiner has determined that the identified abstract idea (judicial exception) is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements are merely instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, as described in MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, in MPEP 2106.05(f) it is noted that "[use] of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.” Therefore, according to the MPEP, this is not solely limited to computers but includes other technology that, recited in an equivalent to “apply it,” is a mere instruction to perform the abstract idea on that technology.
Claims 1 and 11 recite the following additional elements:
the system comprising: non-transitory electronic storage;
a digital item;
one or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions to: establish one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server; effectuate communication of information from the server to the remotely located client computing platform over the one or more network connections to cause the remotely located client computing platform to present an instance of a user interface; and,
effectuate storage of information in the non-transitory electronic storage.
These elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, per MPEP 2106.05(f). Applicant has described these computing elements generically in their disclosure, at Specification [0019, 0049, 0051. 0053, and 0054], and Figure 1, as filed. Applicant has also broadly defined digital within the disclosure; see [0026]. Therefore, this term too refers to information that is created, stored, or transmitted in electronic format (e.g. computer files). Accordingly, alone and in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
At Step 2B of eligibility analysis, the Examiner has determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they do not amount to more than simply instructing one to practice the abstract idea by using generically recited devices to perform the steps that define the abstract ideas. As discussed above, the additional elements of (the system comprising: non-transitory electronic storage; digital; one or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions; one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server; and, a user interface), are recited at a high level of generality and are instructions to apply the exception on a computer. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) does not provide significantly more per MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 2 – 8 and 12 – 18 contain further recitations to the same abstract idea found in claims 1 and 11. References to units of work, work unit records, user input, and digital content, (image video, PDF, text, etc.), are further recitations to core facets of the input information that is input and indicates humans working on the content and interacting among others. Therefore, they are directed to managing personal behavior or relationships, or interactions between people. The work units tracked are performed based on the instructions from one employee to another. Furthermore, these claims just recite implementing the abstract ideas on a computer. This not sufficient to provide for integration into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Dependent claims 9, 10, 19, and 20, contain further recitations to the same abstract idea found in claims 1 and 11. References to a user interface and displays the are held as meaning to simply display the data to a user, using an ordinary component. This amounts to no more than simply instructing one to practice the abstract idea by using generically recited devices. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) does not provide significantly more per MPEP 2106.05(f).
Therefore, for the reasons set above, claims 1 – 20 are directed to an abstract idea without integration into a practical application and without reciting significantly more.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,229,726. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims 1 – 20 are anticipated variants described by the patent claims.
Those claim elements within the application that are identical to the patent claims are listed (and highlighted) below.
Those certain items that are not patently distinct, but are nonetheless anticipated include the following.
The instant application recites a network connection, while the patent claims recite an Internet connection. Because the instant claims utilize remote computing devices, it is obvious to consider a network connection as being over the Internet, (the most prevalent way to connect remote devices). Therefore, a network connection within the instant claims is anticipated by the patent claims.
The instant application recites wherein the digital content item is an image file, a video file, an audio file, or a text document. Noting that digital content would necessarily be a computer-based, electronic version of an image, video, or audio, this version is anticipated as the image, video or audio files within the patent. Further, the text format recited by the instant application is anticipated by the patent as a word document - words and text being synonymous.
A complete listing of all claims follows.
Application 18/956,704
Patent 12,229,726
Claim 1
Claim 1
A system configured to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the system comprising: non-transitory electronic storage storing environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work, the first work unit record including a digital content item expected to be reviewed in order to complete the first unit of work;
and one or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions to:
establish one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server;
effectuate communication of information from the server to the remotely located client computing platform over the one or more network connections to cause the remotely located client computing platform to present an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment,
wherein the digital content item is made accessible through the user interface;
generate, at the server and responsive to obtaining user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the digital content item through the user interface presented at the remotely located client computing platform,
a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a record hierarchy;
and effectuate storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage.
A system configured to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the system comprising: non-transitory electronic storage storing environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work assigned to a first user, the first work unit record including a first digital content item that the first user is expected to review in order to complete the first unit of work;
and one or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions to:
establish the one or more Internet connections between the first remotely located client computing platform and the server;
effectuate communication of information from the server to the first remotely located client computing platform over the one or more Internet connections so that the first remotely located client computing platform presents an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment,
wherein the first work unit record and the first digital content item are accessed through the user interface;
generate, at the server and responsive to obtaining the user input information,
obtain, at the server, user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the first digital content item through the user interface presented at the first remotely located client computing platform;
a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a first record hierarchy
and effectuate storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage.
Claim 2
Claim 2
The system of claim 1, wherein the second work unit record includes an instance of the digital content item.
The system of claim 1, wherein the second work unit record for the second unit of work includes an instance of the first digital content item.
Claim 3
Claim 3
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input includes one or more comments embedded in the digital content item.
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input includes one or more comments embedded in the first digital content item.
Claim 4
Claim 4
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input includes text identifying the digital content item.
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input includes text identifying the first digital content item.
Claim 5
Claim 5
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input information further includes input content of the user input, and wherein the second work unit record is generated to include the input content.
The system of claim 1, wherein the user input information further includes input content of the user input, and wherein the second work unit record for the second unit of work includes the input content.
Claim 6
Claim 6
The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more physical processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to: identify a user as an assignor of the first work unit record; and assign the second work unit record to the user.
The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more physical processors are further configured by the machine-readable instructions to: based on a second user being an assignor of the first work unit record to the first user, assign the second work unit record to the second user.
Claim 7
Claim 7
The system of claim 1, wherein the digital content item is an image file, a video file, an audio file, or a text document.
The system of claim 1, wherein the first digital content item is an image, a video, an audio file, a PDF, or a word document.
Claim 8
Claim 8
The system of claim 7, wherein the digital content item is the text document.
The system of claim 7, wherein the first digital content item is the word document.
Claim 9
Claim 9
The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface further displays one or more other work unit records.
The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface further displays other work unit records assigned to the first user.
Claim 10
Claim 10
The system of claim 9, wherein the user interface further displays the one or more other work unit records based on individual start dates and/or due dates.
The system of claim 9, wherein the user interface further displays the other work unit records assigned to the first user based on individual start dates and/or due dates
Claim 11
Claim 11
A method to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the method comprising: storing, in non-transitory electronic storage, environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work,
the first work unit record including a digital content item
expected to be reviewed in order to complete the first unit of work;
establishing one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server;
effectuating communication of information from the server to the remotely located client computing platform over the one or more network connections to cause the remotely located client computing platform to present an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment, wherein the digital content item is made accessible through the user interface;
generating, at the server and responsive to obtaining user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the digital content item through the user interface presented at the remotely located client computing platform,
a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a record hierarchy;
and effectuating storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage.
A method to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the method comprising: storing, in non-transitory electronic storage, environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment, the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work assigned to a first user,
the first work unit record including a first digital content item that the first user is expected to review in order to complete the first unit of work;
establishing the one or more Internet connections between the first remotely located client computing platform and the server;
effectuating communication of information from the server to the first remotely located client computing platform over the one or more Internet connections so that the first remotely located client computing platform presents an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment, wherein the first work unit record and the first digital content item are accessed through the user interface;
obtaining, at the server, user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the first digital content item through the user interface presented at the first remotely located client computing platform;
generating, at the server and responsive to obtaining the user input information,
a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a first record hierarchy including the first work unit record and the second work unit record;
and effectuating storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage.
Claim 12
Claim 12
The method of claim 11, wherein the second work unit record includes an instance of the digital content item.
The method of claim 11, wherein the second work unit record for the second unit of work includes an instance of the first digital content item.
Claim 13
Claim 13
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input includes one or more comments embedded in the digital content item.
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input includes one or more comments embedded in the first digital content item.
Claim 14
Claim 14
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input includes text identifying the digital content item.
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input includes text identifying the first digital content item.
Claim 15
Claim 15
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input information further includes input content of the user input, and wherein the second work unit record is generated to include the input content.
The method of claim 11, wherein the user input information further includes input content of the user input, and wherein the second work unit record for the second unit of work includes the input content.
Claim 16
Claim 16
The method of claim 11, further comprising: identifying a user as an assignor of the first work unit record; and assigning the second work unit record to the user.
The method of claim 11, further comprising: based on a second user being an assignor of the first work unit record to the first user, assigning the second work unit record to the second user.
Claim 17
Claim 17
The method of claim 11, wherein the digital content item is an image file, a video file, an audio file, or a text document.
The method of claim 11, wherein the first digital content item is an image, a video, an audio file, a PDF, or a word document.
Claim 18
Claim 18
The method of claim 17, wherein the digital content item is the text document.
The method of claim 17, wherein the first digital content item is the word document.
Claim 19
Claim 19
The method of claim 11, wherein the user interface further displays one or more other work unit records.
The method of claim 11, wherein the user interface further displays other work unit records assigned to the first user.
Claim 20
Claim 20
The method of claim 19, wherein the user interface further displays the one or more other work unit records based on individual start dates and/or due dates.
The method of claim 19, wherein the user interface displays the other work unit records assigned to the first user based on individual start dates and/or due dates.
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.
Claims 1 – 9 and 11 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kulkarni (US 2018/0075387), in view of Van Der Ploeg (2013/0151421).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Kulkarni discloses: a system configured to generate work unit records in a collaboration environment, the system comprising: non-transitory electronic storage storing environment state information maintaining a collaboration environment; (see [0028] disclosing an operating environment for collaboration, see also Fig 1. Kulkarni includes the above components at [0057] and Figure 8);
the environment state information including a first work unit record describing a first unit of work, the first work unit record including a digital content item expected to be reviewed in order to complete the first unit of work; (see [0024] detailing tasks and work items associated with a project; noting that a tasks is one example of a work unit as defined within the instant Specification at [0026]. Further see [0031-0032] detailing electronic documents that a user interacts with – thereby disclosing digital content to be reviewed);
establish one or more network connections between a remotely located client computing platform and a server; effectuate communication of information from the server to the remotely located client computing platform over the one or more network connections to cause the remotely located client computing platform to present an instance of a user interface of the collaboration environment, wherein the digital content item is made accessible through the user interface; (see [0030] disclosing network connections to a server and [0050] adding remote and distributed systems; see [0034] and Figures 2A and 2B detailing a user interface comprising action item information (work units). [0048] adds user interface display examples where an application (environment) is opened and documents accessed);
and effectuate storage of information defining the second work unit record in the non-transitory electronic storage; (see [0055] disclosing storage and retrieval for user interaction created data; [0061] details volatile and nonvolatile media).
Not disclosed by Kulkarni is generate, at the server and responsive to obtaining user input information conveying user input on, or relating to, the digital content item through the user interface presented at the remotely located client computing platform, a second work unit record for a second unit of work, the second work unit record being subordinate to the first work unit record within a record hierarchy.
However, Van Der Ploeg discloses a method of updating projects in accordance with inputs and teaches relationships between tasks, or as taught, as dependencies. See [0020] teaching dependencies among tasks and the order of completion to be followed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generate subtask with a hierarchical structure per the method of Van Der Ploeg, within Kulkarni’s collaboration method and system because this leads to the intended result of updates, edits, and tasks being done in the necessary order. Both the cited prior art and the instant application understand the dependencies among work units (tasks) and rely on some tasks being completed before others can start, as detailed at This is congruent with the description provided in the instant Specification, at [0026]. Van Der Ploeg further teaches the importance of tasks that are related hierarchically. See [0003]).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the second work unit record includes an instance of the digital content item; (see [0023] teaching a work item being generated from user input in another work unit. [0024] continues teaching creation of the work unit and [0025] details linking the documents).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the user input includes one or more comments embedded in the digital content item; (see [0041] teaching embedding a link (a ‘string’ – a comment) into another document. See also Fig 4B and “create work item” ‘408 associated with a string).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the user input includes text identifying the digital content item; (see [0032] teaching a user interacting with an electronic document by inputting text).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the user input information further includes input content of the user input, and wherein the second work unit record is generated to include the input content; (first, see [0036] where a work extraction system receives a string comprising information associated with an action item – a task, (or work unit). Next, see [0039] detailing a work generator, generating a work item. Last, see [0041] where the system embeds a link to the work unit into a document. See also Figures 4A through 5A, illustrating the creation of a new task, within a parent task).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Not disclosed by Kulkarni is identifying a user as an assignor of the first work unit record; and assigning the second work unit record to the user.
However, Van Der Ploeg discloses a method of updating projects in accordance with inputs and suggest tasks assigned to team members. See [0023]. See also [0040] teaching members only making changes to tasks assigned to them).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manage assignment of work units (tasks) per the method of Van Der Ploeg, within Kulkarni’s collaboration method and system because this leads to the intended result of proper management of the dependency and relationships of tasks and users, important within a collaborative environment as detailed at [0020].
Regarding claims 7 and 17, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the digital content item is an image file, a video file, an audio file, or a text document; (see [0031] detailing electronic documents (digital content) includes word documents and text input.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 7 and 17, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the digital content item is the text document; (see [0031] detailing electronic documents (digital content) includes word documents and text input.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, above.
Further disclosed by Kulkarni is wherein the user interface further displays one or more other work unit records; (see Fig 5B illustrating an example user interface element displayed in an application user interface when a work item is generated).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kulkarni, in view of Van Der Ploeg, further in view of Laderer (2017/0323350).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the combination of Kulkarni and Van Der Ploeg discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 19, above.
Not disclosed is wherein the user interface further displays the one or more other work unit records based on individual start dates and/or due dates.
However, Laderer discloses a work management platform that displays workflows by roles and teaches filtering via an interface, see [0058] and suggest due dates, at [0067]. See also Fig 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display work units by due dates per the method of Laderer, within Kulkarni’s collaboration method and system because these recited dates are common and important information in collaborative work and an ordered list by these dates is one of many effective formats in which to view project elements, as discussed at [0067].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Newhouse discloses managing project tasks using content items. Truong details moderated collaborative editing in collaborative content items. The NPL document discusses shared workspaces.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DON EDMONDS whose telephone number is (571) 272-6171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm 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, 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.
DONALD J. EDMONDS
Examiner
Art Unit 3629
/SARAH M MONFELDT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3629