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 examiner acknowledges receipt of the preliminary amendments filed 1/17/25. Claims 1-20 are canceled and Claims 21-39 are newly added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Specifically, Claim 39 refers to a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, the computer-readable instructions being executable by a computing device comprising processing hardware to execute a method as claimed in Claim 30, but Claim 30 is drawn to a computer-implemented method for game control via a graphical user interface. Claim 39 fails to further limit the computer-implemented method of Claim 30 from which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 21-39 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-11, and 13-16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) and in further view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer. The subject matters of Claims 21-36 as it relates to an apparatus, computer-implemented method, and a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, the computer-readable instructions being executable by a computing device comprising processing hardware to execute the method for game control via a graphical user interface, the apparatus comprising: a display screen; and a processor configured to (the processor implements method) to generate and display the graphical user interface on the display screen, wherein the graphical user interface presents at least one user-controllable object and at least one target object; executing an action on the at least one target object from the at least one user-controllable object when it is detected that the at least one target object lies within a predetermined area around the at least one user-controllable object are encompassed within claims 1-3, 5-11, and 13-16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793.
However, U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 lacks explicitly suggesting the subject matters of claims 21-36 as it relates to highlighting or enlarging at least one directional indicator on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface. Nonetheless, an analogous art of Fung teaches a similarly structured apparatus, method, and/or product (abstract) that includes highlighting (¶ 49 – “animated image representative of the object sored in a library associated with the games application. Graphic element 602 can include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow. The ring element 604 is configured to visually emphasize the icon, such as icon 508 from FIG. 5. For example, ring element 604 can be a visually distinct color and include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow.”) or enlarging at least one directional indicator (508, 600 icons including direction elements) on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface (¶ 41-43, 45-54, Figs. 4-6d). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product (¶ 67-74) of U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 with the directional indicator means of Fung to effectively communicate information to the player in a compact environment (Fung - ¶ 3). Such a modification being a key component to the video game’s success or failure (Fung - ¶ 15) and compensate for the limitations of traditional mobile devices (Fung - ¶ 19).
U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 in view of Fung teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting generating/providing the at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object. However, an analogous art of Freelancer teaches a video game product that includes generating/providing at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object (time 0:00-5:21, emphasis on time 1:45-1:59, see below screenshots). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product of U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 in view of Fung, particularly the highlighted or enlarged at least one directional indicator of U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 in view of Fung, such that said at least one directional indicator is generated/provided during or after execution of the action on the at least one target as taught by Freelancer because such a modification would have yielded predictable results, namely, a means of providing directional indicators during game play in which at least U.S. Patent No. 11,484,793 in view of Fung is intended (see above). Such a modification would effectively communicate game information to the player during key moments in the game or during game play in general; thereby, making the overall game more user-friendly.
Claims 21-39 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 7-11, and 13-14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) and in further view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer. The subject matters of Claims 21-36 as it relates to an apparatus, computer-implemented method, and a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, the computer-readable instructions being executable by a computing device comprising processing hardware to execute the method for game control via a graphical user interface, the apparatus comprising: a display screen; and a processor configured to (the processor implements method) to generate and display the graphical user interface on the display screen, wherein the graphical user interface presents at least one user-controllable object and at least one target object; executing an action on the at least one target object from the at least one user-controllable object when it is detected that the at least one target object lies within a predetermined area around the at least one user-controllable object are encompassed within claims 1-4, 7-11, and 13-14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637.
However, U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 lacks explicitly suggesting the subject matters of claims 21-36 as it relates to highlighting or enlarging at least one directional indicator on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface. Nonetheless, an analogous art of Fung teaches a similarly structured apparatus, method, and/or product (abstract) that includes highlighting (¶ 49 – “animated image representative of the object sored in a library associated with the games application. Graphic element 602 can include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow. The ring element 604 is configured to visually emphasize the icon, such as icon 508 from FIG. 5. For example, ring element 604 can be a visually distinct color and include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow.”) or enlarging at least one directional indicator (508, 600 icons including direction elements) on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface (¶ 41-43, 45-54, Figs. 4-6d). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product (¶ 67-74) of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 with the directional indicator means of Fung to effectively communicate information to the player in a compact environment (Fung - ¶ 3). Such a modification being a key component to the video game’s success or failure (Fung - ¶ 15) and compensate for the limitations of traditional mobile devices (Fung - ¶ 19).
U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 in view of Fung teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting generating/providing the at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object. However, an analogous art of Freelancer teaches a video game product that includes generating/providing at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object (time 0:00-5:21, emphasis on time 1:45-1:59, see below screenshots). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 in view of Fung, particularly the highlighted or enlarged at least one directional indicator of U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 in view of Fung, such that said at least one directional indicator is generated/provided during or after execution of the action on the at least one target as taught by Freelancer because such a modification would have yielded predictable results, namely, a means of providing directional indicators during game play in which at least U.S. Patent No. 12,220,637 in view of Fung is intended (see above). Such a modification would effectively communicate game information to the player during key moments in the game or during game play in general; thereby, making the overall game more user-friendly.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 21-25, 30-34, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2022/0080316) in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) and in further view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer.
Claims 21, 30, and 39: Huang teaches an apparatus (¶ 22), computer-implemented method, and a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, the computer-readable instructions being executable by a computing device comprising processing hardware to execute the method (¶ 23-25) for game control via a graphical user interface (¶ 24-25), the apparatus comprising: a display screen; and a processor configured to (¶ 23-25, 53)(the processor implements method) - generate and display the graphical user interface on the display screen, wherein the graphical user interface presents at least one user-controllable object (406) and at least one target object (410) (Fig. 4, ¶ 45-46); executing an action (execution of a skill) on the at least one target object from the at least one user-controllable object when it is detected that the at least one target object lies within a predetermined area (represented by boundary indicator (408)) around the at least one user-controllable object (¶ 51-52, 55-60, Figs. 4-5);
Huang teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting highlighting or enlarging at least one directional indicator on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface. Huang at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the overall scope of the invention (¶ 69, 71-72). Furthermore, an analogous art of Fung teaches a similarly structured apparatus, method, and/or product (abstract) that includes highlighting (¶ 49 – “animated image representative of the object sored in a library associated with the games application. Graphic element 602 can include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow. The ring element 604 is configured to visually emphasize the icon, such as icon 508 from FIG. 5. For example, ring element 604 can be a visually distinct color and include various effects that emphasize the element, such as a glow.”) or enlarging at least one directional indicator (508, 600 icons including direction elements) on the graphical user interface, the at least one directional indicator configured to indicate a direction to move the at least one user-controllable object to find at least one additional target object that is not currently visible in the graphical user interface (¶ 41-43, 45-54, Figs. 4-6d). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product (¶ 67-74) of Huang with the directional indicator means of Fung to effectively communicate information to the player in a compact environment (Fung - ¶ 3). Such a modification being a key component to the video game’s success or failure (Fung - ¶ 15) and compensate for the limitations of traditional mobile devices (Fung - ¶ 19).
Huang in view of Fung teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting generating/providing the at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object. Huang at least teaches that various modifications can be provided without departing from the overall scope of the invention (see above). Furthermore, an analogous art of Freelancer teaches a video game product that includes generating/providing at least one directional indicator during or after execution of the action on the at least one target object (time 0:00-5:21, emphasis on time 1:45-1:59, see below screenshots).
PNG
media_image1.png
682
1162
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
682
1161
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
683
1165
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, method, and/or product of Huang in view of Fung, particularly the highlighted or enlarged at least one directional indicator of Huang in view of Fung, such that said at least one directional indicator is generated/provided during or after execution of the action on the at least one target as taught by Freelancer because such a modification would have yielded predictable results, namely, a means of providing directional indicators during game play in which at least Huang in view of Fung is intended (see above). Such a modification would effectively communicate game information to the player during key moments in the game or during game play in general; thereby, making the overall game more user-friendly.
Claims 22 and 31: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelaner teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: present a boundary indicator (408) representing a boundary of the predetermined area around the at least one user-controllable object on the graphical user interface (Huang - Figs. 4-5, ¶ 51, 55-60); and present the at least one directional indicator along a periphery of the boundary indicator (Fung teaches that the at least one directional indicator is provided along the edge or boundary of the graphical user interface - ¶ 46, based on the above one of ordinary skill in art understands that the teaching of Fung applied to Huang results in the at least one directional indicator being provided along the edge of graphical user interface of Huang resulting in the directional indicator being provided along a periphery of the boundary indicator since the boundary indicate surrounds the user-controllable object). However, in the alternative, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the at least one directional indicator of Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer such that it is presented along a periphery of the boundary indicator since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claims 23 and 32: Huang teaches the apparatus further comprising and a control object (402/404) (Fig. 4, ¶ 45-46) and wherein the processor is further configured to present the boundary indicator only while the user is providing a user input (combination of selection input and aiming input of a skill of Huang, (Figs. 4-5, ¶ 47-48, 52, emphasis on ¶ 52)) via the control object (¶ 51, 55-60 (the user provides the user input and upon release thereof results in execution of the selected skill, wherein the boundary indicator is only presented while receiving user input), Fig. 5 - immediately after execution of the skill aimed in Fig. 4 it is shown that the boundary 408 is no longer visible e.g. execution of the skill results in no presentation of the boundary which is a result of no longer receiving user input).
Claims 24 and 33: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer teaches wherein the processor is further configured to present the at least one directional indicator along a periphery of the graphical user interface (Fung – see above, ¶ 46).
Claims 25 and 34: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer teaches wherein the indicated direction of the directional indicator is to a second region of interest that is beyond a current view presented by the graphical user interface (Fung – see above, ¶ 4, 18, 45-46, 47, 50, 52-53, 63).
Claim(s) 26 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2022/0080316) in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) in view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer, and in further view of Yabe (US 2002/0119811).
Claims 26 and 35: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting wherein the at least one user- controllable object comprises a plurality of user-controllable objects, and wherein the processor is configured to enable the user to control the movement of the plurality of user-controllable objects within the graphical user interface in a synchronized manner, based on the user input. Huang at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the overall scope of the invention (see above). Furthermore, an analogous art of Yabe teaches at least one user- controllable object comprises a plurality of user-controllable objects, and wherein the processor is configured to enable the user to control the movement of the plurality of user-controllable objects within the graphical user interface in a synchronized manner, based on the user input (abstract, ¶ 6-7, 38, 48-52, 57-69, Figs. 3, 7-13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus/method of Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer with the synchronization means of Yabe to enable a player to manipulate a plurality of characters simultaneously and obviate a necessity of the player deliberately switching a player character which is an object of manipulation (Yabe - ¶ 6).
Claim(s) 27 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2022/0080316) in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) in view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer, and in further view of of Linden (US 2015/0051001).
Claims 27 and 36: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting wherein the at least one user- controllable object comprises a plurality of user-controllable objects, and wherein the processor is configured to execute a first action and a second action on the at least one target object from a first user-controllable object and a second user-controllable object, from amongst the plurality of user-controllable objects, respectively, when it is detected that the at least one target object lies within the predetermined area. Huang at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the overall scope of the invention (see above). Furthermore, an analogous art of Linden teaches wherein the at least one user- controllable object comprises a plurality of user-controllable objects, and wherein the processor is configured to execute a first action and a second action on the at least one target object from a first user-controllable object and a second user-controllable object, from amongst the plurality of user-controllable objects, respectively, when it is detected that the at least one target object lies within the predetermined area (abstract, Fig. 3, ¶ 19-20, 24-26, 29, 34, 58, 60, 62-63, 65-66, 69, 75, emphasis on ¶ 60, 65-66). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer with the first and second action means of Linden to provide different game play patterns to the overall game (Linden - ¶ 24, 31). Such a modification would add to the variety of the game; making the overall game more enjoyable.
Claim(s) 29 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2022/0080316) in view of Fung (US 2022/0080310) in view of Freelancer Best Ship Titan with best weapons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywdd1Aq4cYo ), herein Freelancer, and in further view of Tang (US 2018/0043260).
Claims 29 and 38: Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer teaches the above, in addition to wherein the graphical user interface presents a control object, and wherein the processor is configured to: - enable the user to provide the user input via the control object (see above with respect to Huang), but lacks explicitly suggesting enabling the user to re-locate the control object within the graphical user interface. Huang at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the overall scope of the invention (see above) and characters having varying skills (¶ 27). Furthermore, an analogous art of Tang teaches a processor configured to enable the user to re-locate the control object within the graphical user interface (abstract, Figs. 3-4, 7-8, ¶ 167-169, 190-130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Huang in view of Fung in view of Freelancer with the relocating means of Tang to provide an easier means for users to add and/or search for skills (Tang - ¶ 4-5) and reduce the amount of space the control objects (skill) use within the graphical user interface (Tang - ¶ 30). Such a modification improves the efficiency of the game (Tang - ¶ 4-5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28 and 37 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please see attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAMAR HARPER whose telephone number is (571)272-6177. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571) 270-1344. 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.
/TRAMAR HARPER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights