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 Amendment
The amendment filed on February 17, 2026 has been entered. Applicant has amended claim 1. Claims 14, 22-24 were previously cancelled. Claims 1-13 and 15-21 are now pending, have been examined and currently stand rejected.
Claim Interpretation
The applicant’s disclosure contains lexicographer term. See applicant’s Specification, p. 21. For example the term “cryptographic proof” in claims 1, 13, 15, 17-18, and 19 will be interpreted as a concise representation of a transaction's inclusion within a specific block of the blockchain.
Examiner notes that claim 1 recites “updating… upon…”, which is language directed to a contingent limitation. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April, 28, 2016).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-13 and 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eutsler et al. (US 2024/0386489 A1), “Eutsler” in view of Durvasula et al (US 2024/0428229 A1), “Durvasula”, in view of Snow (US 20220405260 A1), “Lee” in view of Lee (US 2020/0301944 A1), “Lee”.
Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1: Eutsler disclose A computerized method for maintaining a plurality of retirement plans for a user using a combination of a blockchain account and an off-chain account associated with the user, the plurality of retirement plans being sponsored by a plurality of employers of the user and associated with corresponding plan rules, the method comprising:
creating and maintaining the blockchain account for the user, the blockchain account comprising (i) one or more digital wallets corresponding to one or more, each digital wallet storing current election of one or more funds along with one or more crypto tokens representative of fiat money, shares of the one or more funds and individual and employer contributions; and (ii) a smart contract configured to manage the one or more digital wallets, the corresponding plan rules and the individual and employer contributions; (See at least Eutsler, Fig. 3; Fig. 8; [0034]; [0037]; [0044-0045]; [0074]; [0088]; [0131] The client system can include a mobile wallet system; the one or more processors generate share tokens based on a number of shares corresponding to the first funds; smart contract control structure can detect the wallet token via the client link. The blockchain storage 168 may be used to track exchanges (e.g., deposits, withdrawals, and updates of tokens) for each of the specific token accounts.)
receiving, via a digital user interface associated with the off-chain account of the user, a transaction request with respect to a target retirement plan from the plurality of retirement plans; and
processing, by the smart contract of the blockchain account of the user, the transaction request including: (See at least Eutsler, Fig 6-7.; [0003-0005];
ensuring compliance of the transaction request with the plan rules associated with the target retirement plan; (See at least Eutsler, [0070];)
minting or burning at least one of a cash token or a fund token in relation to the one or more crypto tokens in the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan to execute the transaction request without requiring a bank for fiat money transfer; (See at least Eustler, Abs.; Fig. 5; [0129]; [0153]; [0164]; where at least one of a cash token or a fund token in relation to the one or more crypto tokens in the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan (i.e., first funds) are minted (e.g., by tokenizing the first funds).)
updating the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan to reflect a balance in the digital wallet after execution of the transaction request; and (See at least Eutsler, [0124]; [0171]; where the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan (i.e., token account) is updated to reflect a balance in the digital wallet after execution of the transaction request (i.e., to reflect the change).)
emitting a notification event to the corresponding off-chain account to synchronize with the blockchain account by honoring the transaction request; and (See at least Eutsler, [0057];
Eutsler disclose a token asset exchange between token accounts. (Eutsler, Abs.) However, Eutsler does not explicitly disclose the one or more digital wallets corresponding to one or more retirement account types of the retirement plans sponsored by the employers.
Durvasula, on the other hand, teaches the one or more digital wallets corresponding to one or more retirement account types of the retirement plans sponsored by the employers. (See at least Durvasula, [0113]; [0053]; [0063]; [0070]; [0127])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Eutsler that is capable to transfer assets between account using tokens and include Durvasula’s teachings in order to implement funds and tokens exchange into retirement accounts systems.
The combination of Eutsler and Durvasula disclose assets transaction using token and on-chain with off-chain accounts. The combination does not explicitly disclose; however Snow teaches:
maintaining, by a synchronization module, data integrity and data security of the processed transaction request (See at least Snow, [0179]).by:
updating, the user's off-chain account, to include transaction data that honors the transaction request upon receiving the notification event from the blockchain account, (See at least Snow, [0059]; [0110]; [0159]; The Synthetic Transaction chain in each BVN handles transactions that are produced by the system when a transaction needs to update accounts across multiple identities in different BVNs. The synthetic transaction chain provides cryptographic proof that a synthetic transaction was actually produced by a particular BVN.)
creating a cryptographic proof comprising a root hash of a Merkel tree that combines multiple hashes representative of a batch of multiple transactions, including a hash of the transaction data for the processed transaction request; (See at least Snow, Abs.; [0028]; [0145-0145]; SMT/Anchor system).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Snow would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. It would have been recognized that storing off-chain data related to the transaction to the teachings of the above combination would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such data processing features into similar systems.
The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula and Snow does not explicitly disclose, however Lee teaches:
storing, on chain in the user's blockchain account, the root hash; and (See at least Lee, Fig. 2; Fig 4; [0009]; [0026]; [0039]; [0043]; and storing the root transaction in a blockchain storage. stores only the root value of the Merkle tree on the blockchain while the root value is contained in a transaction.)
storing, off chain in the user's off-chain account, the hash corresponding to the processed transaction request along with the transaction data. (See at least Lee, Fig. 4; [0009; [0036]; [0045]; [0047] Before, after, or simultaneously with operation 210, the computing device 110 stores each data object in the off-chain storage 120. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, a method of storing off-chain data includes collecting a plurality of transactions for a plurality of data objects.)
verifying the processed transaction by providing the hash from the user's off-chain account to the user's on-chain account to reconstruct a path to the root hash. (See at least Lee, Fig. 6; [0062]; [0065-0066]; the computing device 110 recalculates the Merkle root value on the basis of the hash values stored in the reference data object accessed in operation 620 and a current hash value of a data object to be verified. That is, the computing device 110 re-calculates the Merkle root using the hash values stored in the reference data object 410 accessed in operation 620 and the current hash value of the corresponding data object.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Lee’s teachings in order to permit verification and auditing.
The portion which recite “to execute the transaction request without requiring a bank for fiat money transfer” is the intended use/result of why at least one of a cash token or a fund token are minted or burned.
Furthermore, the portion which recites “to reflect a balance in the digital wallet after execution of the transaction request” is the intended use/result of why the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan is updated.
Additionally, the portion which recite “to synchronize with the blockchain account by honoring the transaction request” is the intended use of why a notification event is emitted.
The portion which recites, “to honor the transaction request” is the intended use of updating transaction data.
Further, the portion which recite, “that honors the transaction request…” is non-functional descriptive material because it describes, at least in part the transaction data.
The portion which recites “that combines multiple hashes representative of a batch of multiple transactions” is non-functional descriptive material describing the Merkle Tree.
It has been held that non-functional descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.
Examiner has provided prior art, where available, for these intended use and/or non-functional phrases/limitations, however, these phrases/limitations will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability. Accordingly, the prior art is only provided in the interest of compact prosecution.
The applicant is reminded that these portions, i.e., intended use/result, do not further limit the scope of the claim as the limitations, or portions thereof, do not claim the functions as being positively recited actions or functions, and/or they do not add any meaning or purpose to the associated manipulative step(s). See MPEP 2103 C and 2111.04. Simply because the limitation recites something as being "for ... [performing a specific functionality]", etc. does not mean that the functions are required to be performed, or are actually performed.
Examiner notes claim 1 recites “updating… upon…”, language directed to a contingent limitation. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April, 28, 2016).
Regarding claim 3: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the blockchain account of the user includes a non-fungible token (NFT) uniquely identifies the user, guarantees on-chain ownership and connects associated data and metadata of the plurality of retirement accounts, including retirement account data in the user’s off-chain account. (See at least Eutsler, [0085]; Token identifier).
Regarding claim 4: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the different retirement account types comprise different types of 401(k) plans, Roth plans, or after-tax plans. (See at least Durvasula, [0053]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination that is capable to transfer assets between account using tokens and include Durvasula’s teachings of describing the types of accounts in order to implement funds and tokens exchange into retirement accounts systems.
Regarding claim 5: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the at least one cash token is representative of one or more of fiat currency and stablecoins held within a digital wallet of the user, and wherein the at least one cash token is fungible. (See at least Eutsler, [0113]; [0125]; wherein the at least one cash token (i.e., token) is representative of one or more of fiat currency and stablecoins (i.e., assets) held within a digital wallet of the user and wherein the at least one cash token is fungible (i.e., assets exchanges utilized token such as fungible tokens).)
Regarding claim 6: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the at least one fund token is representative of one or more of shares in a fund and tokenized asset classes held within a digital wallet of the user, and wherein the at least one fund token is semi-fungible in that fund tokens of the same fund are fungible and fund tokens of different funds are non-fungible. Eutsler disclose wherein the at least one fund token is representative of one or more of shares in a fund and tokenized asset classes held within a digital wallet of the user (See at least Eutsler, Fig. 5; [0107]; [0131]) .
Eutsler does not explicitly disclose however Durvasula teaches wherein the at least one fund token is semi-fungible in that fund tokens of the same fund are fungible and fund tokens of different funds are non-fungible (See at least Durvasula, [0035]; A digital wallet can be used to maintain and manage a variety of digital assets, such as fungible tokens (e.g., digital coins or cryptocurrency), nonfungible tokens (NFTs), semi-fungible tokens (SFTs), etc.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination that is capable to transfer assets between account using tokens and include Durvasula’s teachings of describing the type of tokens.
Regarding claim 7: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein minting at least one of a cash token or a fund token comprises adding a new token to the blockchain account, and wherein burning at least one of a cash token or a fund token comprises removing an existing token from the blockchain. (See at least Eutsler, Abs.; Fig. 5; [0004-0005]; [0024]; [0085]; [0116]; where minting (i.e., generating) the at least one of a cash token or a fund token comprises adding a new token to the blockchain account, and wherein burning (i.e., burning) at least one of a cash token or a fund token comprises removing an existing token from the blockchain.)
Regarding claim 8: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the transaction request comprises one of contribution, withdrawal, exchange dividend allocation, rollover or a corporate action that necessitates adjustment to one or more holdings with respect to the target retirement plan.(See at least Eutsler, [0054])
Regarding claim 9: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the transaction request comprises a contribution request to the target retirement plan and processing the contribution request by the smart contract comprises:
determining an amount of fiat currency for contribution to the target retirement plan; (See at least Eutsler, Fig. 5; [0003]; [0128-0129]; [0133- 0134]; [0149] where an amount of fiat currency (i.e.., first funds) for contribution to the target retirement plan (i.e., token account) is determined.)
minting an equivalent amount of crypto assets comprising at least one of cash tokens, stablecoins or tokenized digital assets for addition to the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan; (See at least Eutsler, [0003]; [0005]; [0127]; [0128-0129]; [0149]. Where an equivalent amount of crypto assets comprising at least one of cash tokens are minted (e.g., when asset is tokenized and first tokens are generated).)
minting an equivalent amount of fund tokens for addition to the digital wallet while burning the minted crypto assets from the digital wallet; (See at least Eutsler, [0003]; [0005]; [0127-0129]; [0149]. (e.g., Converting includes burning the second tokens by transmitting the second tokens to an un-spendable address, and retrieving the second funds from a return funds account).)
updating the digital wallet balance to reflect the minted fund tokens from the contribution. (See at least Eutsler, [0124]; For example, the exchange processor can update a token account based on the amount of the exchange (e.g., update current balance of the dynamic token exchange instrument) indicated in the dynamic token exchange object).)
Applicant is reminded that the portion which recites “to reflect the minted fund tokens from the contribution” is intended use result language.
Regarding claim 10: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the transaction request comprises a withdrawal request from the target retirement plan and processing the withdrawal request by the smart contract comprises:
burning an equivalent amount of fund tokens from the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan; (See at least Eutsler, [0126]; [0139]; [0156])
if the withdrawal request is in fiat currency, minting an equivalent amount of: (i) cash tokens for addition to the digital wallet and wire transferring an equivalent fiat amount to a bank account of the user, or (ii) stablecoins or tokenized digital assets for addition to the digital wallet without wire transferring to a bank account of the user; and (See at least Eutsler, [0156]; [0164])
updating the digital wallet balance to reflect the burnt fund tokens and minted cash tokens, stablecoins or tokenized digital assets for the withdrawal. (See at least Eutsler, [0124]; For example, the exchange processor can update a token account based on the amount of the exchange (e.g., update current balance of the dynamic token exchange instrument) indicated in the dynamic token exchange object).)
The phrase which recites to reflect the burnt fund tokens and minted cash tokens, stablecoins or tokenized digital assets for the withdrawal is intended use/result of updating the digital wallet balance.
Regarding claim 11: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; wherein the transaction request comprises an exchange request from an originating fund to a target fund within the target retirement plan and processing the exchange request by the smart contract comprises:
burning a specific amount of fund tokens from the originating fund in the digital wallet associated with the target retirement plan; (See at least Eutsler, Fig. 5; [0003]; [0129]; [0133- 0134]; [0149] when first funds are tokenized.)
minting an equivalent amount of crypto asset comprising at least one of cash tokens, stablecoins or tokenized digital assets; (See at least Eutsler, [0003]; [0005]; [0127]; [0129]; [0149]. Where an equivalent amount of crypto assets comprising at least one of cash tokens are minted (e.g., when asset is tokenized and first tokens are generated).)
minting an equivalent amount of fund tokens for addition into the target fund in the digital wallet while burning the minted crypto asset; and (See at least Eutsler, [0003]; [0005]; [0127]; [0129]; [0149]. (e.g., Converting includes burning the second tokens by transmitting the second tokens to an un-spendable address, and retrieving the second funds from a return funds account).)
updating the balance in the digital wallet of the user to reflect the exchange in fund tokens between the originating fund and the target fund. (See at least Eutsler, [0124]; For example, the exchange processor can update a token account based on the amount of the exchange (e.g., update current balance of the dynamic token exchange instrument) indicated in the dynamic token exchange object).)
The phrase which recites to reflect the exchange in fund tokens between the originating fund and the target fund is intended use/result of updating the digital wallet balance.
Regarding claim 12: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose; further comprising digitally signing the transaction request prior to processing the transaction request by the smart contract to verify authenticity, integrity, and non-repudiation of the transaction request. (See at least Eutsler, [0039]; [0043]; [0053] a token initiated by the blockchain storage can be temporarily transferred to the cold storage ledger to sign it before the exchange occurs on the blockchain storage.)
The phrase which recites “to verify authenticity, integrity, and non-repudiation of the transaction request” is the intended use of digitally signing the transaction request prior to processing the transaction request.
Regarding claim 13: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose wherein the cryptographic proof is a hashed-proof-of - commitment for recording an individual off-chain transaction. (See at least Snow, [0179]; [0183]; [0185])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Snow’s teachings in order to maintain security in user’s account.
Regarding claim 16: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose further comprising digitally signing the proof of execution of the transaction request. (See at least Durvasula, [0003]; [0043]; [0076])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Durvasula’s teachings in order to reducing the risk of theft or unauthorized access. Durvasula, [0043].
Regarding claim 17: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose further comprising storing a proof of execution in the user's off-chain accounting that includes a transaction identifier, information about the transaction request, information about the cryptographic proof, and a timestamp of the execution of the transaction request. (See at least Snow, [0003]; [0179]; [0183])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Snow’s teachings in order to maintain security in user’s account.
Regarding claim 18: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose wherein the information about the cryptographic proof comprises a path of a cryptographic hash within a Merkle tree, including hashes of one or more sibling nodes. (See at least Snow, [0179]; [0183])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Snow’s teachings in order to maintain security in user’s account.
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 17. The combination further disclose storing the root hash of the Merkel tree of the cryptographic proof on chain in a separate on-chain account dedicated to storing transaction proofs. (See at least Eutsler, [0054])
Applicant is reminded that the portion which recites “dedicated to storing transaction proofs” is non-functional descriptive material. Therefore, does not further limit the scope of the claim.
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 17. The combination further disclose storing, in the off-chain account, transaction details, details about a commitment scheme in relation to the cryptographic proof, the user’s account details, and the user’s personal identifiable information, wherein the details about the commitment scheme includes one or more of polynomial coefficients or intermediate hashes. (See at least Snow, [0067]; [0179]; [0185]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Snow’s teachings in order to maintain security in user’s account.
Regarding claim 21: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 13. The combination further disclose wherein the blockchain account maintains a commitment hash and revealed value, and the off-chain account manages original transaction details for the hashed-proof-of -commitment scheme. (See at least Snow, [0004]; [0031]; [0105]; [0161]; [0179]; [0183])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Snow’s teachings in order to maintain security in user’s account.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Santilli et al. (US 10686590 B2), “Santilli”.
Regarding claim 2: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. The combination further disclose, wherein the blockchain account of the user further includes an on-chain identification of the user. (See at least Eutsler, [0075]; example, the wallet token can include an identifier of the token, a hash of the token, an identifier of a token account linked with the token, a token account linked with the request to transfer the token, an identifier of a public-private key pair.
However, the combination does not specifically disclose cryptographically calculated from the user’s personal information stored in the corresponding off-chain account.
Santilli, on the other hand, teaches that it was known in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to cryptographically calculate identifier on-chain identifier from off-chain account. (See at least Santilli, claim 1, Abs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Santilli’s teachings in order to secure privacy and protect user privacy.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mishra et al. (US 20240411831 A1), “Mishra”.
Regarding claim 15: The combination of Eutsler, Durvasula, Snow and Lee disclose the method of claim 1. However, the combination does not specifically disclose wherein the cryptographic proof further includes a polynomial proof of commitment for recording an individual off-chain transaction.
Mishra, on the other hand, teaches wherein the cryptographic proof is a polynomial proof of commitment for recording an individual off-chain transaction. (See at least Mishra, [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above combination and include Mishra’s teachings in order to maintain data integrity.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s amendments and arguments (see remarks, pp. 7-10, filed on 02/17/2026), with respect to the rejection to the claims under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered. Applicant asserts that the cited prior art do not teach or suggest at least the following elements of amended claim 1: “storing, on chain in the user's blockchain account, the root hash; storing, off chain in the user's off-chain account, the hash corresponding to the processed transaction request along with the transaction data; and verifying the processed transaction by providing the hash from the user's off-chain account to the user's on-chain account to reconstruct a path to the root hash.”. Examiner agrees. However, upon further consideration of the newly introduced language, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Eutsler, Durvasula and Lee Examiner notes this feature is disclosed by “Lee”.
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 KARLYANNIE M GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)272-6950. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 4:30-pm.
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, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575. 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.
/K.G.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/EDUARDO CASTILHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3698
Prosecution Insights