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
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
1. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim(s) 18 is/are drawn to method (i.e., a process), claim(s) 1, 15 is/are drawn to a system (i.e., a machine/manufacture. As such, claims 1, 15, 18 is/are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention.
Claims 1-20 are directed to transmitting data. Specifically, the claims recite receiving a first constant bit rate (CBR) service;generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service, wherein the first block sequence consists of a first start block, M first data blocks, and a first termination block, the first block sequence comprises first indication information and a first padding area, the first indication information indicates that no service data is padded in the first padding area, the first CBR service is not padded in the first padding area, and a length of the first padding area is less than a length of a first data block, wherein M is a positive integer, wherein the length of the first data block is equal to a length of an idle block, which is grouped within the Mathematical Concepts and is similar to the concept of (mathematical relationships OR mathematical formulas or equations OR mathematical calculations) OR Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and is similar to the concept of (fundamental economic principles or practices including hedging insurance, mitigating risk) OR (commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors business relations) OR (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities teaching, and following rules or instructions) OR Mental Processes and is similar to the concept of (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 54 (January 7, 2019)). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 53-54 (January 7, 2019)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 54-55 (January 7, 2019)), the additional element(s) of the claim(s) such as apparatus, and a processor merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or generally link(s) the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Specifically, the apparatus, and a processor perform(s) the steps or functions of obtaining the first CBR service based on the first block sequence/sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus. The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 56 (January 7, 2019)), the additional element(s) of using a apparatus, and a processor to perform the steps amounts to no more than using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of transmitting data. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, the apparatus, and a processor perform(s) the steps or functions of sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus/ obtaining the first CBR service based on the first block sequence. These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of transmitting data. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-14, 16,17,19, 20 further describe the abstract idea of transmitting data. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent App Pub 20200195760) in view of Gorshe (U.S. Patent App Pub 20200287998).
Regarding claim 1,
Wang teaches a first communication apparatus, wherein the first communication apparatus comprises: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the first communication apparatus to perform operations including: receiving a first constant bit rate (CBR) service; (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches CBR)
generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service, wherein the first block sequence consists of a first start block, M first data blocks, and a first termination block, the first block sequence comprises first indication information and a first padding area, the first indication information indicates that no service data is padded in the first padding area, (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches the padding area)
sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus. (See paragraphs 3, 62-64, fig 1, Wang teaches sending the data)
Wang does not explicitly but Gotsche teaches the first CBR service is not padded in the first padding area, and a length of the first padding area is less than a length of a first data block, wherein the length of the first data block is equal to a length of an idle block, wherein M is a positive integer. (See figures 4 and paragraphs 55-58, Gorsche teaches a idle block is sized and equal to length of first data block)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Gorshe with Wang because both deal with CBR. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Gorshe into Wang is that Gorshe teaches the data blocks and path overhead blocks are preferably distributed rather than lumped together for greater immunity to error bursts because they are used later to help reconstruct the client signal clock for the client constant bit rate (CBR) signal at the sink node. The system allows using a generic mapping procedure n the path overhead for adapting the path stream to the source's server channel such that it can pass through intermediate nodes and provide the sink node with the frequency (rate) information that it can use for recovering the client signal, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0005] - [0007], Gorshe)
Regarding claim 2,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving a second CBR service; generating, based on the second CBR service, a second block sequence carrying the second CBR service, wherein the second block sequence consists of a second start block, M second data blocks, and a second termination block, the second block sequence comprises second indication information and a second padding area, the second indication information indicates that service data is padded in the second padding area, the second CBR service is padded in the second padding area, and a length of the second padding area is less than a length of a second data block; and sending the second block sequence to the second communication apparatus. .(See paragraphs 116, 124, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 3,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service comprises: obtaining a first container, wherein the first container comprises first data extracted from the first CBR service, the first indication information, and the first padding area; and encoding the first container to obtain the first block sequence. .(See paragraphs 65-66, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 4,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the first container comprises a container overhead and a container payload, the container payload comprises the first padding area and the first data, and the container overhead comprises the first indication information.(See paragraphs 70-71, Wang)
Regarding claim 5,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the first container comprises a container overhead and a container payload, the container overhead comprises the first indication information and the first padding area, and the container payload comprises the first data. .(See paragraphs 73-74, Wang)
Regarding claim 6,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the first container further comprises a fixed padding area, a fixed pattern is padded in the fixed padding area, and the fixed padding area does not carry service data. .(See paragraphs 63-64, Wang)
Regarding claim 7,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the M first data blocks carry the first container, and the first start block and the first termination block do not carry the first container. .(See paragraphs 70-71, 124 Wang)
Regarding claim 8,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the M first data blocks and the first termination block carry the first container, and the first start block does not carry the first container. .(See paragraphs 115-116, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 9,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first communication apparatus communicates with the second communication apparatus by using a fine-granularity technology. .(See paragraphs 65-66, abstract, Wang)
Regarding claim 10,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the first block sequence belongs to a first flexible Ethernet (FlexE) sub-client, wherein the sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus comprises: mapping the first FlexE sub-client to at least one sub-slot that is in a fine-granularity basic unit fgBU and that is allocated to the first FlexE sub-client. .(See paragraphs 70, 66, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 11,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the first block sequence belongs to a first metro transport network fine-granularity path (MTN fg-path), wherein the sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus comprises: mapping the first MTN fg-path to at least one sub-slot that is in an MTN fgBU and that is allocated to the first MTN fg-path. .(See paragraphs 70, 66, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 12,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein before the generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service, the operations further comprise: receiving a third CBR service; and the generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service comprises: generating, based on the first CBR service and the third CBR service, the first block sequence carrying the first CBR service and the third CBR service, wherein the first block sequence further comprises third indication information and a third padding area, the third indication information indicates that no service data is carried in the third padding area, the service data is not padded in the third padding area, and a sum of lengths of the third padding area and the first padding area is less than the length of the first data block. .(See paragraphs 110-112, Wang)
Regarding claim 13,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein before the generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service, the operations further comprise: receiving a fourth CBR service; and the generating, based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service comprises: generating, based on the first CBR service and the fourth CBR service, the first block sequence carrying the first CBR service and the fourth CBR service, wherein the first block sequence further comprises fourth indication information and a fourth padding area, the fourth indication information indicates that service data is padded in the fourth padding area, the fourth CBR service is padded in the fourth padding area, and a sum of lengths of the fourth padding area and the first padding area is less than the length of the first data block. .(See paragraphs 117-119, Wang)
Regarding claim 14,
Wang and Gorsche teach the first communication apparatus according to claim 2, wherein before the generating, based on the second CBR service, a second block sequence carrying the second CBR service, the operations further comprise: receiving a fifth CBR service; and the generating, based on the second CBR service, a second block sequence carrying the second CBR service comprises: generating, based on the second CBR service and the fifth CBR service, the second block sequence carrying the second CBR service and the fifth CBR service, wherein the second block sequence further comprises fifth indication information and a fifth padding area, the fifth indication information indicates that service data is padded in the fifth padding area, the fifth CBR service is padded in the fifth padding area, and a sum of lengths of the fifth padding area and the second padding area is less than the length of the second data block. .(See paragraphs 123-124, Wang)
Regarding claim 15,
Wang teaches a second communication apparatus, wherein the second communication apparatus comprises: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the second communication apparatus to perform operations including: (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches CBR)
receiving a first block sequence that is sent by a first communication apparatus and that carries a first CBR service, wherein the first block sequence consists of a first start block, M first data blocks, and a first termination block, the first block sequence comprises first indication information and a first padding area, the first indication information indicates that no service data is padded in the first padding area, (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches the padding area)
obtaining the first CBR service based on the first block sequence. (See paragraphs 3, 62-64, fig 1, Wang teaches sending the data)
Wang does not explicitly but Gotsche teaches the first CBR service is not padded in the first padding area, and a length of the first padding area is less than a length of a first data block, wherein the length of the first data block is equal to a length of an idle block, wherein M is a positive integer. (See figures 4 and paragraphs 55-58, Gorsche teaches a idle block is sized and equal to length of first data block)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Gorshe with Wang because both deal with CBR. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Gorshe into Wang is that Gorshe teaches the data blocks and path overhead blocks are preferably distributed rather than lumped together for greater immunity to error bursts because they are used later to help reconstruct the client signal clock for the client constant bit rate (CBR) signal at the sink node. The system allows using a generic mapping procedure n the path overhead for adapting the path stream to the source's server channel such that it can pass through intermediate nodes and provide the sink node with the frequency (rate) information that it can use for recovering the client signal, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0005] - [0007], Gorshe)
Regarding claim 16
Wang and Gorsche teach the second communication apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving a second block sequence that is sent by the first communication apparatus and that carries a second CBR service, wherein the second block sequence consists of a second start block, M second data blocks, and a second termination block, the second block sequence comprises second indication information and a second padding area, the second indication information indicates that service data is padded in the second padding area, the second CBR service is padded in the second padding area, and a length of the second padding area is less than a length of the second data block; and obtaining the second CBR service based on the second block sequence. .(See paragraphs 115-116, fig 3a, Wang)
Regarding claim 17
Wang and Gorsche teach the second communication apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the obtaining the first CBR service based on the first block sequence comprises: decoding the first block sequence, to obtain a first container, wherein the first container comprises first data extracted from the first CBR service, the first indication information, and the first padding area; and obtaining the first CBR service from the first container. .(See paragraphs 74-76, fig 1, Wang)
Regarding claim 18,
Wang teaches a communication method, wherein the method comprises: receiving, by a first communication apparatus, a first constant bit rate (CBR) service; (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches CBR)
generating, by the first communication apparatus based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service, wherein the first block sequence consists of a first start block, M first data blocks, and a first termination block, the first block sequence comprises first indication information and a first padding area, the first indication information indicates that no service data is padded in the first padding area, the first CBR service is not padded in the first padding area, (See paragraphs 3, 69-71, fig 4, Wang teaches the padding area (See paragraphs 3, 110-114, fig 4, Wang teaches the padding area)
sending, by the first communication apparatus, the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus. (See paragraphs 3, 62-64, fig 1, Wang teaches sending the data)
Wang does not explicitly but Gotsche teaches a length of the first padding area is less than a length of a first data block, wherein the length of the first data block is equal to a length of an idle block, wherein M is a positive integer. (See figures 4 and paragraphs 55-58, Gorsche teaches a idle block is sized and equal to length of first data block)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Gorshe with Wang because both deal with CBR. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Gorshe into Wang is that Gorshe teaches the data blocks and path overhead blocks are preferably distributed rather than lumped together for greater immunity to error bursts because they are used later to help reconstruct the client signal clock for the client constant bit rate (CBR) signal at the sink node. The system allows using a generic mapping procedure n the path overhead for adapting the path stream to the source's server channel such that it can pass through intermediate nodes and provide the sink node with the frequency (rate) information that it can use for recovering the client signal, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0005] - [0007], Gorshe)
Regarding claim 19,
Wang and Gorsche teach the method according to claim 18, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the first communication apparatus, a second CBR service; generating, by the first communication apparatus based on the second CBR service, a second block sequence carrying the second CBR service, wherein the second block sequence consists of a second start block, M second data blocks, and a second termination block, the second block sequence comprises second indication information and a second padding area, the second indication information indicates that service data is padded in the second padding area, the second CBR service is padded in the second padding area, and a length of the second padding area is less than a length of a second data block; and sending, by the first communication apparatus, the second block sequence to the second communication apparatus. (See paragraphs 3, 62-64, fig 1, Wang )
Regarding claim 20,
Wang and Gorsche teach the method according to claim 18, wherein the generating, by the first communication apparatus based on the first CBR service, a first block sequence carrying the first CBR service comprises: obtaining, by the first communication apparatus, a first container, wherein the first container comprises first data extracted from the first CBR service, the first indication information, and the first padding area; and encoding, by the first communication apparatus, the first container to obtain the first block sequence. .(See paragraphs 115-116, fig 3a, Wang)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong One. As for Step 2A Prong One, of the Abstract idea is directed towards the abstract idea of transmitting data which is grouped within the Methods Of Organizing Human Activity and is similar to the concept of (fundamental economic principles or practices including hedging insurance, mitigating risk) OR (commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors business relations) OR (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities teaching, and following rules or instructions) OR Mental Processes and is similar to the concept of (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 54 (January 7, 2019)). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 53-54 (January 7, 2019)).
B. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong Two. As for Step 2A Prong Two, the claim limitations do not include additional elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, and the claim is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception and the claim limitation simply describe the abstract idea. The limitation directed to transmitting data does not add technical improvement to the abstract idea. The recitations to memory and processor perform(s) the steps or functions of sending the first block sequence to a second communication apparatus/ obtaining the first CBR service based on the first block sequence. The use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
C. Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to a judicial exception under Step 2B.
As for Step 2B, The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. 50, 52, 56 (January 7, 2019)), the limitation directed to transmitting data does not add significantly more to the abstract idea. Furthermore, using well-known computer functions to execute an abstract idea does not constitute significantly more. The recitations to memory and processor are generically recited computer structure. These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of transmitting data. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and located in the PTO-892 form.
1.Chhaya, U.S. Patent 8306031, teaches a method of performing wireless communications. The method receives at a receiving unit a sequence of data blocks from a transmitting unit. The method also identifies at the receiving unit a first number of invalid sequential data blocks in the sequence and a second number of valid sequential data blocks in the sequence. The method also communicates from the receiving unit a wireless message to the transmitting unit. The wireless message comprises a first field that specifies the first number and a second field that specifies the second number--the encoding of the first field is operable to specify a different maximum than an encoding of the second field.
2. Chae, U.S. Patent App 20100174961, teaches an apparatus is capable of allocating an ACK/NACK channel in a wireless communication system. The apparatus performs a method for allocating the ACK/NACK channel at a base station that includes generating ACK/NACK channel allocation information of a packet transmitted to a terminal; inserting the ACK/NACK channel allocation information into the packet using a padding area indicative of a size difference of data carried by the packet and an Automatic Repeat Request (ARQ) block; and transmitting the packet comprising the inserted ACK/NACK channel allocation information to a terminal to service.
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 NINOS DONABED whose telephone number is (571)272-8757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00pm - 4:00pm.
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, John Follansbee can be reached on (571) 272-3964. 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.
/NINOS DONABED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
