DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the Application filed on January 17, 2025, which is a national stage application under 35 U.S.C. §371 of International Application No. PCT/CN2023/105899, filed on July 05, 2023, which claims foreign priority of Chinese patent application No. 202310473009.3, filed on April 27, 2023, and Chinese patent application No. PCT/CN2022/109143, filed on July 29, 2022.
Claims 1-52 have been cancelled and new claims 53-72 have been entered via preliminary amendment. An action on the merits follows. Claims 53-72 are pending on the application.
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 .
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 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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 and 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed Chinese patent application No. PCT/CN2022/109143 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application, as follows.
Claim 71 recites the limitation “… invoking a writing function according to interactive instructions corresponding to the recognition result, and displaying menu items of the writing function in a writing area” in lines 5-6 of the claim.
However, prior-filed Chinese patent application No. PCT/CN2022/109143 fails to provide adequate support or enablement for aforementioned feature limitations of claim 71 above.
Accordingly, claim 71 is not entitled to the benefit of the prior-filed Chinese patent application No. PCT/CN2022/109143.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 71 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ZHAO et al. (WO Publication No. 2023/000613 A1), hereafter referred to as ZHAO.
Regarding claim 71, ZHAO discloses an interaction method (Par. [0003-7]: present disclosure relates to the technical field of human-computer interaction, and in particular, to a display device and a method for displaying… present disclosure provides a display device and a chart display method… improving the interactive experience of the intelligent conference) based on figure recognition (Par. [0007-15]: present disclosure provides a display device and a chart display method thereof, which are used for recognizing… data written by a user… method, including… identifying the writing track information of the display area of the display screen to obtain a data identification result; Par. [0096]: method provided in this embodiment, track information written by a user can be automatically identified; an interaction method based on figure recognition (e.g. device and method for recognizing (i.e. identifying) data written (i.e. figures, drawing instructions, etc.) by a user, as indicated above), for example), comprising:
receiving trajectory information of a figure drawn by a user (Par. [0007-15]: present disclosure provides a display device and a chart display method thereof, which are used for recognizing… data written by a user… control circuit includes a processor and a memory, the memory is configured to store a program executable by the processor, and the processor is configured to read a program in the memory and perform the following steps… identifying the writing track information of the display area of the display screen to obtain a data identification result… method, including… identifying the writing track information of the display area of the display screen to obtain a data identification result; Par. [0024-26]: present disclosure further provides an automatic binning projection method, including… acquiring writing track information of a display area of a display screen… determining each row separation line and each column separation line according to a first projection histogram of the writing trajectory information in a first coordinate axis and a second projection histogram of the writing trajectory information in a second coordinate axis; Par. [0096-108]: track information written by a user can be automatically identified… after the… drawing instruction of the user is received, the obtained writing trajectory information is recognized… the writing trajectory information may be first recognized to obtain the data identification result; Par. [0111-121]: if it is determined that the user stops writing and waiting for the preset time, the writing trajectory information of the display region of the display screen is recognized, to obtain the data identification result… data in this embodiment includes a plurality of cells… the cell may further include writing trajectory information of the user, and after writing trajectory information in the cell is recognized, data content of the cell is obtained; receiving trajectory information of a figure drawn by a user (e.g. device and method for recognizing (i.e. identifying) data written (i.e. figures, drawing instructions, etc.) by a user (i.e. a figure drawn by a user) include acquiring (i.e. receiving) writing track information written by the user, for example, including received drawing instructions (i.e. drawings, figures, strokes, etc.) of the user and related trajectory information (i.e. receiving trajectory information of a figure drawn by a user), as indicated above), for example);
performing figure recognition on the trajectory information to obtain a recognition result corresponding to the figure (Par. [0096-108]: track information written by a user can be automatically identified… after the chart drawing instruction of the user is received, the obtained writing trajectory information is recognized… the writing trajectory information may be first recognized to obtain the data identification result; Par. [0111-121]: if it is determined that the user stops writing and waiting for the preset time, the writing trajectory information of the display region of the display screen is recognized, to obtain the data identification result… data in this embodiment includes a plurality of cells… the cell may further include writing trajectory information of the user, and after writing trajectory information in the cell is recognized, data content of the cell is obtained; Par. [0154-172]: determine the data recognition result in any one of the following manners… determine a trajectory point of a cell, and then identify a trajectory point of each cell… determining writing track information included in each unit cell… identifying the writing track information contained in each unit cell to obtain data content of each unit cell… the content written by the user can be identified more accurately according to the association relationship between the writing order and the coordinates of each trajectory point… the algorithm for performing writing trajectory recognition in this embodiment includes… a handwriting recognition algorithm…The handwriting recognition algorithm is used to recognize the trajectory points in each cell, to obtain the final content, that is, the data content; performing figure recognition on the trajectory information to obtain a recognition result corresponding to the figure (e.g. device and method for recognizing (i.e. identifying) data written (i.e. figures, drawing instructions, etc.) by a user (i.e. a figure drawn by a user) include acquiring (i.e. receiving) writing track information written by the user, for example, including received drawing instructions (i.e. drawings, figures, strokes, etc.) of the user and related trajectory information, for example, which is recognized to obtain a data identification (i.e. recognition) result (i.e. performing figure recognition on the trajectory information to obtain a recognition result corresponding to the figure), as indicated above), for example); and
invoking a writing function according to interactive instructions corresponding to the recognition result, and displaying menu items of the writing function in a writing area (Par. [0096-108]: track information written by a user can be automatically identified… after the chart drawing instruction of the user is received, the obtained writing trajectory information is recognized… the writing trajectory information may be first recognized to obtain the data identification result; Par. [0310-311]: drawing instruction includes at least one of an arrow drawing instruction, a circular drawing instruction, a polygon drawing instruction, a cylindrical drawing instruction, and a rectangle drawing instruction… the user can use the touch assembly to perform the drawing of the first graphic on the display interface, and the processor recognizes the first graphic type, and determines different types of charts according to different first graphic categories… after the first graphic corresponding to the chart drawing instruction is identified, the generation of the selection menu is further included before the chart type is determined, for example, after a certain first graphic is identified, a candidate menu may be generated, a selection icon of at least one chart type among the candidate menus or a selection icon including one chart type and a selection icon of at least one other operation object are determined, and the chart type is determined according to a selection operation (for example, a click) of the user on the selection icon; Par. [0371-383]: if it is determined that the user stops writing and waits for a preset time, the writing track information of the display area of the display screen is recognized to obtain the data identification result… writing software in this implementation is used to indicate that a user can write a book on a display interface by using a stylus or a finger, and perform real-time display on content written by the user. The writing software includes but is not limited to a writing function, an identification function of a touch signal, an identification function of a stylus, and other additional functions. The writing function includes but is not limited to writing, erasing, marking, annotating, clearing… The writing software in this embodiment includes a software entity having a basic writing function, and in this embodiment, functions other than the basic writing function included in the writing software are not limited... after receiving the second graphic drawn by the user on the first display interface of the writing software, the non-standard second graphic drawn by the user is identified as a standard second graphic, for example… after the processor performs the recognition, it is determined as a rectangle to control the display screen to display a standard rectangle, and at the same time, a candidate menu may also be generated on the first display interface, for example, next to a standard rectangle, where the candidate menu includes a first start icon corresponding to the second pattern; in response to a touch operation performed by the user on the first launch icon, triggering display of a second display interface of the chart type corresponding to the second graphic in the display area… after drawing the second graphic on the first display interface of the writing software, the user generates a candidate menu on the first display interface, where the candidate menu includes a first start icon, and the first start icon is used to start a second display interface of the chart type corresponding to the second pattern; Par. [0393-397]: for example, when the user draws a circle on the first display interface, the candidate menu is displayed on the first display interface, the pie icon and the KANO icon are displayed in the candidate menu… present embodiment may further provide a method for partitioning a display area, so as to distinguish a user from writing, receive a writing area of writing track information of a user… implementation of the method is as follows… the writing area is configured to receive writing track information of a user… the writing area is configured to receive writing track information and other touch operations of the user, the user may perform normal writing, clicking, and other control operations in the writing area… the writing track information of the user is continuously received; and invoking a writing function according to interactive instructions corresponding to the recognition result, and displaying menu items of the writing function in a writing area (e.g. device and method for recognizing (i.e. identifying) data written (i.e. figures, drawing instructions, etc.) by a user (i.e. a figure drawn by a user) include acquiring (i.e. receiving) writing track information written by the user, for example, including received drawing instructions (i.e. drawings, figures, strokes, etc.) of the user and related trajectory information, which is recognized to obtain a data identification (i.e. recognition) result, for example, including writing software (i.e. function, operation, process, application, etc.) that is executed (i.e. invoked, launched, etc.) by a processor and includes a writing function (i.e. and invoking a writing function according to interactive instructions) and other additional functions, including generation (i.e. invoking, launching, etc.) of a selection menu that is further included in a display interface, after a graphic corresponding to a drawing instruction is identified, for example, and the display interface includes a writing area (i.e. invoking a writing function according to interactive instructions corresponding to the recognition result, and displaying menu items of the writing function in a writing area), as indicated above), for example).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 53-70 and 72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 53 recites the limitation “receiving first trajectory information of a figure hand-drawn by a user… wherein the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” in lines 2-4 of the claim.
However, the claimed “interactive instructions associated with first text information” limitation recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53 is not defined by the claims or the specification of this application.
Par. [0332] of the specification of this application indicates that “the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information, the controller 3401 is specifically configured to perform following steps: according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list, performing an association operation on the displayed text”, for example.
Although the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53 could be potentially interpreted as “performing an association operation on the displayed text”, as indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, there is no recitation in the claim of performing steps “according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list” and no further definition (or steps) corresponding to “performing an association operation on the displayed text” based on the claimed “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” was found in the specification.
Therefore, as indicated above, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the necessary steps to define the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53, or the necessary steps to define “performing an association operation on the displayed text” indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, because they are not properly described in the application as filed.
Claims 54-70 are rejected by virtue of being dependent upon rejected base claim 53.
Claim 72 recites the limitation “receiving first trajectory information of a figure hand-drawn by a user… wherein the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” in lines 4-6 of the claim.
However, the claimed “interactive instructions associated with first text information” limitation recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72 is not defined by the claims or the specification.
Par. [0332] of the specification of this application indicates that “the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information, the controller 3401 is specifically configured to perform following steps: according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list, performing an association operation on the displayed text”, for example.
Although the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72 could be potentially interpreted as “performing an association operation on the displayed text”, as indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, there is no recitation in the claim of performing steps “according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list” and no further definition (or steps) corresponding to “performing an association operation on the displayed text” based on the claimed “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” was found in the specification.
Therefore, as indicated above, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the necessary steps to define the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72, or the necessary steps to define “performing an association operation on the displayed text” indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, because they are not properly described in the application as filed.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 53-70 and 72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 53 recites the limitation “receiving first trajectory information of a figure hand-drawn by a user… wherein the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” in lines 2-4 of the claim.
However, the necessary steps (i.e. processes or operations) required to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” limitation recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53 are not defined by the claims.
Par. [0332] of the specification of this application indicates that “the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information, the controller 3401 is specifically configured to perform following steps: according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list, performing an association operation on the displayed text”, for example.
Although the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53 could be potentially interpreted as “performing an association operation on the displayed text”, as indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, there is no recitation in the claim of performing steps “according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list” and no further definition (or steps) corresponding to “performing an association operation on the displayed text” based on the claimed “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” was found in the claims, or in the specification as filed.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite because it lacks the necessary steps to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53 and the disclosure, as a whole, does not provide a standard for ascertaining the necessary steps to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53, as indicated above.
Claims 54-70 are rejected by virtue of being dependent upon rejected base claim 53.
Claim 54 recites the limitation “received handwriting information written by the use” in line 2 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “received handwriting information written by the user” recited in line 2 of claim 54 encompass embodiments corresponding to the received claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53, or if the claimed “received handwriting information written by the user” recited in line 2 of claim 54 encompass embodiments corresponding to other “handwriting information written by the user” different from the received claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 55 recites the limitation “receiving the handwriting information of a text written by the user” in line 3 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” recited in line 3 of claim 55 encompass embodiments corresponding to the received claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53, or if the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” recited in line 3 of claim 55 encompass embodiments corresponding to other “handwriting information written by the user” different from the received claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 55 further recites the limitation “receiving and displaying the handwriting information of a text written by the user” in line 8 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” recited in line 8 of claim 55 encompass embodiments corresponding to the received claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53, or if the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” recited in line 8 of claim 55 encompass embodiments corresponding to the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” previously recited in line 3 of claim 55, or if the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” recited in line 8 of claim 55 encompass embodiments corresponding to other “handwriting information written by the user” different from the claimed “figure hand-drawn” by the user previously recited in line 2 of claim 53 or the claimed “handwriting information of a text written by the user” previously recited in line 3 of claim 55, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 56 recites the limitation “a plurality of sub-figures hand-drawn by the user” in line 6 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “plurality of sub-figures hand-drawn by the user” recited in line 6 of claim 56 encompass embodiments corresponding to previously recited “plurality of sub-figures” recited in lines 1-2 of claim 56, or if the claimed “plurality of sub-figures hand-drawn by the user” recited in line 6 of claim 56 encompass embodiments corresponding another “plurality of sub-figures hand-drawn by the user” different to the previously recited “plurality of sub-figures” recited in lines 1-2 of claim 56, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 62 recites the limitation “the execution of the interactive instructions comprises” in line 4 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “the execution of the interactive instructions comprises” recited in line 4 of claim 62 encompass embodiments corresponding to previously recited “interactive instructions associated with first text information” previously recited in lines 3-4 of claim 53, or if the claimed “the execution of the interactive instructions comprises” recited in line 4 of claim 62 encompass embodiments corresponding the previously claimed “interactive instructions corresponding to the figure recognition result” recited in line 8 of claim 53, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 62 further recites the limitation “the interactive instructions corresponding to the first sub-figure and the second sub-figure” in lines 12-13 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the interactive instructions corresponding to the first sub-figure and the second sub-figure” in lines 12-13 of the claim. Therefore, the lack of antecedent basis makes the scope of the claim indeterminate.
Claim 63 recites the limitation “perform different association operations on the first text information” in line 8 of the claim.
However, it is not clear if the claimed “different association operations” recited in line 8 of claim 63 encompass embodiments corresponding to previously recited “association operation on displayed first text information” previously recited in line 7 of claim 53, or if the claimed “different association operations” recited in line 8 of claim 63 encompass embodiments corresponding to “different association operations” different to the previously recited “association operation on displayed first text information” recited in line 7 of claim 53, for example.
Therefore, based on above, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clearly set forth and the examiner cannot clearly determine which elements are encompassed by the claim language, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 65 recites the limitation “the association operation on the first text information associated with the first trajectory information” in line 4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the association operation on the first text information associated with the first trajectory information” in line 4 of the claim. Therefore, the lack of antecedent basis makes the scope of the claim indeterminate.
Claim 66 recites the limitation “the association operation on the first text information associated with the first trajectory information” in lines 3-4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the association operation on the first text information associated with the first trajectory information” in lines 3-4 of the claim. Therefore, the lack of antecedent basis makes the scope of the claim indeterminate.
Claim 69 recites the limitation “the generating to-do items… the to-do items” in lines 1-3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the generating to-do items” and “the to-do items” in lines 1-3 of the claim. Therefore, the lack of antecedent basis makes the scope of the claim indeterminate.
Claim 70 recites the limitation “the generating to-do items… the to-do items” in lines 1-3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the generating to-do items” and “the to-do items” in lines 1-3 of the claim. Therefore, the lack of antecedent basis makes the scope of the claim indeterminate.
Claim 72 recites the limitation “receiving first trajectory information of a figure hand-drawn by a user… wherein the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” in lines 4-6 of the claim.
However, the necessary steps (i.e. processes or operations) required to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with first text information” limitation recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72 are not defined by the claims.
Par. [0332] of the specification of this application indicates that “the first trajectory information is configured to trigger execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information, the controller 3401 is specifically configured to perform following steps: according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list, performing an association operation on the displayed text”, for example.
Although the claimed execution of “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72 could be potentially interpreted as “performing an association operation on the displayed text”, as indicated in Par. [0332] above, for example, there is no recitation in the claim of performing steps “according to the interactive instructions corresponding to the global recognition result list” and no further definition (or steps) corresponding to “performing an association operation on the displayed text” based on the claimed “interactive instructions associated with associated text information” was found in the claims, or in the specification as filed.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite because it lacks the necessary steps to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72 and the disclosure, as a whole, does not provide a standard for ascertaining the necessary steps to define the claimed “execution of interactive instructions associated with associated text information” recited in lines 5-6 of claim 72, as indicated above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record cited in PTO-892 and not relied upon appears to be pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. However, due to the inability to determine a reasonable interpretation of claims 53-70 and 72, as indicated above, no prior art rejection or determination of allowability over the prior art was possible during examination of instant application.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUILLERMO M RIVERA-MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571) 272-4979. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 am to 5 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, Andrew Bee can be reached on 571-270-5183. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GUILLERMO M RIVERA-MARTINEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677
Prosecution Insights