Patent Application 18192619 - CHAT SUPPORT PLATFORM HAVING USER-ENABLED CHAT

Title: CHAT SUPPORT PLATFORM HAVING USER-ENABLED CHAT HELP CUSTOMIZATION
Application Information

Invention Title: CHAT SUPPORT PLATFORM HAVING USER-ENABLED CHAT HELP CUSTOMIZATION
Application Number: 18192619
Submission Date: 2025-05-14T00:00:00.000Z
Effective Filing Date: 2023-03-29T00:00:00.000Z
Filing Date: 2023-03-29T00:00:00.000Z
National Class: 705
National Sub-Class: 001100
Examiner Employee Number: 88025
Art Unit: 3629
Tech Center: 3600
Rejection Summary

102 Rejections: 0
103 Rejections: 1
Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:
US 0293107🔗
US 0157618🔗
Office Action Text



    DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a Final Office Action on the merits in response to communications received on 03/17/2025.  Claims 1, 8, and 15 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending and have been addressed below. 
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .

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.

2.	Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application.
3.	Regarding Step 1, claim 1 recites a machine (i.e., a concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices), claim 8 recites a manufacture, (i.e., an article that is given a new form, quality, property, or combination through man-made or artificial means.) and claim 15 recites a process (i.e., an act or step, or a series of acts or steps). Thus, each of the claims fall within one of the four statutory categories. 
4.	Regarding Step 2A [prong 1], the claims recite an abstract idea.  
5.	Independent claims 1, 8, and 15 recite:
“generating a configuration file for a user, the configuration file including a plurality of digital files associated with help operations that include help subjects and help types, the digital file containing identifiers of all fields needed from the user, and instructions on how to initiate a transaction once all necessary information is obtained from the user in the virtual chat communication session;”, “receiving…a user command to set a default help setting to a specified help type;”, “parsing the user command;”, “setting, in response to analyzing the user command, the default help setting to the specified help type;”, “receiving…a user help request comprising a specified help subject;”, “analyzing the user help request to determine an unknown quantity;”, “querying the stored digital files…for the unknown quantity;”, “retrieving the quantity from the stored digital files based on the specified help subject and the default help setting;”	
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitations allow a user interacting with a business to customize help settings, request for help, and retrieve stored digital files corresponding to the request which encompasses a commercial interaction (i.e., marketing/sales activities or business relations) and managing personal behavior or interactions between people (i.e., social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) and mental processes (i.e., observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions) which is subject matter that falls within the certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes groupings of abstract ideas. See MPEP 2106.04 II 
The Applicant’s Specification emphasizes in at least [0002] Financial institutions that provide financial services are increasingly providing a greater number of client services. In order to alleviate call and chat density from customers over a network environment, such client services include automated virtual support agents (e.g., chatbots) who supplement human virtual support agents by directly interacting with customers via text chat, phone, instant messaging, etc.

Consistent with the specification the series of steps recite marketing/sales activities and managing personal behavior or interactions because they allow a user interacting with a business to tailor their communications or responses from the business to meet their individual user needs and preferences. Also, the series of steps recite mental processes for parsing user command, analyzing a user’s request for help, and retrieving  results based on the information found in the request. These limitations involve collecting and comparing known information which are steps that can be practically performed in human mind with or without pen and paper. As such, the claim recites an abstract idea.
6.	Regarding Step 2A [prong 2], independent claims include the following additional elements which do not amount to a practical application: 
“a virtualized server computing system”, “a policy manager” (system manager), “a server computer”, “a virtual machine”, “one or more processors having at least one hardware circuits”, “a non-transitory memory storing virtualization software”, “virtual chat communication sessions”, “a client device”, “a communication network”, “a chatbot on a user interface of the client device”, “using a convolution neural network”, “via chatbot contemporaneously”, “a computer program product”, “stored digital files” – see claims 1, 8, and 15, are recited at a high-level of generality in light of the specification. The applicant’s specification describes the additional elements in general terms without describing any of the particulars, such that the additional element may be broadly but reasonably construed as generic computer components being used to perform the abstract idea. The additional elements merely add the words “apply it” with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05 (f).
	The other additional element of: “causing…to display the quantity from the stored digital files.” adds insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception, i.e., data output, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(g).
	Thus, the additional claim elements are not indicative of integration into a practical application, because the claims 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.
7.	The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of: “a virtualized server computing system”, “a policy manager”, “a server computer”, “a virtual machine”, “one or more processors having at least one hardware circuits”, “a non-transitory memory storing virtualization software”, “virtual chat communication sessions”, “a client device”, “a communication network”, “a chatbot on a user interface of the client device”, “using a convolution neural network”, “contemporaneously”, “a computer program product” – see claims 1, 8, and 15 are at best the equivalent of merely adding the words “apply it” to the judicial exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception cannot provide an inventive concept.
The other additional element of: “causing…to display the quantity from the stored digital files.” was considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity, and thus re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if it is more than well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field.  The OIP Techs court decision cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates: “presenting offers and gathering statistics” is/are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Thus, at Step 2B the claim(s) are ineligible.

Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 depend from claims 1, 8, and 15.
Dependent claims 2, 9, and 16 recite “wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the apparatus to initiate the help operation by executing one or more of: generation of a link for visual display on the user interface of the client device, generation of text instructions for visual display on the user interface of the client device, and initiating an interactive chat help operation.” which adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, i.e., providing data/information to the user, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(g), claims 3, 10, and 17 recite “wherein the link directs the user to a website associated with the financial institution.” which is described at a high-level of generality and serves as a generic computing component being used in it’s ordinary capacity to aid the user in performing the abstract idea, claims 4, 11, and 18 recite “wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the apparatus to initiate the interactive chat help operation by initiating an interactive chat help operation with the virtual support agent.” which narrows how the abstract idea may be performed but does not make the claim any less abstract, claims 5, 12, and 19 recites “wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, enables the help request to comprise a subject and the help operation is based upon the subject” which describes the type of data/information recited in the abstract idea but does not make the claim any less abstract, claim 6, 13, and 20 recites “which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the default help setting to apply to all further virtual chat communication sessions with the user” which further narrows how the abstract idea may be performed but does not make the claim any less abstract, claims 7 and 14 recite “wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the default help setting to apply only to the virtual chat communication session.” which further narrows how the abstract idea may be performed but does not make the claim any less abstract. The dependent claims fail to impose any meaningful limits on integrating the abstract idea into a practical application. 
Thus, after considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. 

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.

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 non-obviousness.

Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon (US 2021/0157618 A1) in view of Leaman (US 2022/0293107 A1).

With respect to claims 1, 8, and 15, Moon discloses: 
a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium having with a set of instructions of computer-executable program code (¶ 0030), which when executed by one or more processors of a server computer (¶ 0028) 
parsing the user command using a convolution neural network (¶ 0050-0053: discloses a convolutional neural network model may implement one or more classifier functions or processes. The outputs of the machine learning algorithms or processes may be used to find one or more requested actions the user may desire);
receiving, from the client device during the virtual chat communication session, a user help request comprising a specified help subject (¶ 0042, 0066: discloses the user may use client device 12 to engage and interface with a chatbot or live agent via the chat platform 10 to assist in conducting a task or otherwise executing an action. The chat platform 10 may be used or provided by a financial institution system to enable users to ask questions or otherwise determine information about accounts, products, services, technical difficulties, etc.);
analyzing the user help request to determine an unknown quantity (¶ 0042, 0066: discloses the chat platform 10, i.e., chatbot 48, determines from message and other content in a chat between a user and the chatbot 48 an intention by the user. For example, the user may ask a direct question such as “information about accounts”.);
querying the stored digital files in the non-transitory memory for the unknown quantity (¶ 0040, 0068: discloses the chat platform, i.e., chatbot 48, accesses client information associated with the user which may include either or both chat data 18 and financial data 68. The client information may include documents, media content or other files that are being shared on the platform 10 via a chat or otherwise stored for the client.); retrieving the quantity from the stored digital files based on the specified help subject and the default help setting (¶ 0040, 0068: discloses the chat platform, i.e., chatbot 48, by accessing the client information described above a fund transfer page or form of banking application can be provided.); and
causing, via chatbot contemporaneously with the virtual chat communication session, to display the quantity from the stored digital files on the user interface of the client device. (¶ 0040, 0056, 0063, 0067, 0069: discloses the client device 12 includes a display for rendering GUIs and other visual outputs on the display of the device. The client device 12 may also include a chatbot module provided by the chat platform to engage in conversational messaging via a chat interface. The client information may include data related to the user, i.e., details of what accounts, balances, etc., the user may have. The client information may include documents, media content or other files that are being shared on the platform 10 via a chat or otherwise stored for the client.)
	The Moon reference does not explicitly disclose the following limitations.
However, the Leaman reference is related to techniques for allowing a client to customize their customer service solution (¶ 0216) and teaches: 
a virtualized server computing system (¶ 0590, 0595, 0628: discloses a virtualized environment), comprising: 
a policy manager (¶ 0638);
a server computer controlled by the policy manager (¶ 0600-0601, 0638), the server computer including a virtual machine (¶ 0638), causes the virtual machine to perform operations including:
generating a configuration file for virtual chat communication sessions of a user, the configuration file including a plurality of digital files associated with help operations that include help subjects and help types (¶ 0216, 0225: discloses configuring a knowledge base for a client. A knowledge base may refer to a collection of articles and other content that may be used to assist a contact when dealing with an issues. The client may provide descriptions of the content, a topic heading of the content. This can be used to classify the content in the knowledge graph to help identify content that is relevant to the customer service issue, support issue, or the like.), 
the digital file containing identifiers of all fields needed from the user (¶ 0216, 0225), and instructions on how to initiate a transaction once all necessary information is obtained from the user in the virtual chat communication session (¶ 0216, 0225: discloses the articles answer frequently asked questions, “how-to”, user manuals and the like.);
receiving, from a client device over a communication network during a virtual chat communication session with a chatbot on a user interface of the client device, a user command to set a default help setting to a specified help type (¶ 0216, 0218: discloses the client may provide one or more customization parameters which may include default attributes and/or custom attributes.) ; 
setting, in response to analyzing the user command and contemporaneously with the virtual chat communication session, the default help setting to the specified help type (¶ 0216, 0220: discloses the platform may utilize the client’s customization parameters to deploy a client specific service system. In this way the customer service offerings may be tailored to the client.); 
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and methods of Moon, to include the features of a virtualized server computing system, comprising: a policy manager; a server computer controlled by the policy manager, the server computer including a virtual machine, causes the virtual machine to perform operations including: causes the virtual machine to perform operations including: generating a configuration file for virtual chat communication sessions of a user, the configuration file including a plurality of digital files associated with help operations that include help subjects and help types, the digital file containing identifiers of all fields needed from the user, and instructions on how to initiate a transaction once all necessary information is obtained from the user in the virtual chat communication session, receiving, from a client device over a communication network during a virtual chat communication session with a chatbot on a user interface of the client device, a user command to set a default help setting to a specified help type, setting, in response to analyzing the user command and contemporaneously with the virtual chat communication session, the default help setting to the specified help type, as disclosed by Leaman to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed by Leaman, the motivation for the combination would have been to provide an ability for users to define and customize the usage of the customer service platform according to their needs. (¶ 0082, 0318, Leaman). 

With respect to claims 2, 9, and 16, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus, computer program product, and computer-implemented method, wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the apparatus to initiate the help operation by executing one or more of: 
	generation of a link for visual display on the user interface of the client device (Fig. 6, ¶ 0071-0072: Moon discloses the action message includes a link 117 that is selectable in the chat user interface 110 by the user.), generation of text instructions for visual display on the user interface of the client device, and initiating an interactive chat help operation.

With respect to claims 3, 10, and 17, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus, computer program product, and computer-implemented method, 
	wherein the link directs the user to a website associated with the financial institution. (¶ 0072: Moon discloses the link 117 may direct the user to a certain form, page, or tab used to complete at least a portion of the action. The chat platform 10 or the financial institution system pre-populates at least one field in the application user interface that are used to execute the action.)

	With respect to claims 4, 11, and 18, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus, computer program product, and computer-implemented method, 
	wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the apparatus to initiate the interactive chat help operation by initiating an interactive chat help operation with the virtual support agent. (¶ 0042, 0086: Moon discloses the chatbot 48 can follow-up with the user by sending a follow-up message. The user may use the client device to engage and interface with the chatbot or live agent to assist in conducting a task or otherwise executing an action.)

	With respect to claims 5, 12, and 19, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus, computer program product, and computer-implemented method, wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, enables the help request to comprise a subject (¶ 0042, 0066: Moon discloses an intention by the user to execute an action. The chat platform may be used and/or provided to enable users to ask questions or otherwise determine information about accounts, services, technical difficulties.) and the help operation is based upon the subject (¶ 0069: discloses the chatbot uses the intent to enable action(s) to be executed.)

	With respect to claims 6, 13, and 20, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus, computer program product, and computer-implemented method, 
	wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the default help setting to apply to all further virtual chat communication sessions with the user. (¶ 0027, 0040, 0067-0068: Moon discloses the chatbot uses previous activities for suggesting an action to a user.)

	With respect to claims 7 and 14, the combination of Moon and Leaman discloses the apparatus and computer program product, 
	wherein the set of instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the default help setting to apply only to the virtual chat communication session. (¶ 0027, 0040, 0067-0068: Moon discloses the chatbot user the context of the conversation exchange between the chatbot and the user for suggesting an action to a user.)

Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 March 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. 

With Respect to Rejections Under 35 USC 101
Applicant argues “Disputed Claims Are Directed to Patentable Subject Matter On page 3 of the Office Action, the Office asserts the claims recite: "...an abstract idea of organizing settings for a user while interacting with a financial service agent which encompasses a commercial interaction (i.e., marketing/sales activities or business relations) and managing personal behavior or interactions between people (i.e., social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) and mental processes (i.e., observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions) which is subject matter that falls within the certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes groupings of abstract ideas. See MPEP 2106.04 II." As established hereinbelow, Applicant respectfully contends that the disputed claims recite patentable subject matter that conforms to the standards of §101.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
	Contrary to the remarks, the previous rejection under Step 2A Prong One of the analysis identified the limitations that recite an abstract idea and explained why these limitations fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes groupings of abstract ideas. In the present rejection, the series of steps recite marketing/sales activities and managing personal behavior or interactions because they allow a user interacting with a business to tailor their communications or responses from the business to meet their individual user needs and preferences. Also, the series of steps recite mental processes for parsing user command, analyzing a user’s request for help, and retrieving  results based on the information found in the request. As such, the amended limitations further narrow how the abstract idea may be performed but do not make the claimed invention any less abstract. For these reasons, the rejections under 101 are being maintained.

Applicant further argues “Disputed Claims Do Not Seek to Tie Up All Forms of Organizing User Settings As set forth at §2106.06(a) of the MPEP: Applicant respectfully contends that the disputed claims (e.g., representative independent claim 1) as presently presented are consistent with this standard in presenting non-generic hardware and software components (e.g., a policy manager, a server computer controlled by the policy manager, the server computer including a virtual machine, one or more processors having at least one hardware circuit, and a non- transitory memory storing virtualization software) to perform an ordered combination of operations in a virtualized computing environment. Indeed, humans are incapable of performing the following ordered combination of operations performed in a virtualized environment: 
"...generating a configuration file for virtual chat communication sessions of a user, the configuration file including a plurality of digital files associated with help operations that include help subjects and help types, the digital file containing identifiers of all fields needed from the user, and instructions on how to initiate a transaction once all necessary information is obtained from the user in the virtual chat communication session; receiving, from a client device over a communication network during a virtual chat communication session with a chatbot on a user interface of the client device, a user command to set a default help setting to a specified help type; parsing the user command using a convolution neural network; setting, in response to analyzing the user command and contemporaneously with the virtual chat communication session, the default help setting to the specified help type; receiving, from the client device during the virtual chat communication session, a user help request comprising a specified help subject; analyzing the user help request to determine an unknown quantity; 
querying the stored digital files in the non-transitory memory for the unknown quantity; 
retrieving the quantity from the stored digital files based on the specified help subject and the default help setting; and causing, via chatbot contemporaneously with the virtual chat communication session, to display the quantity from the stored digital files on the user interface of the client device." As such, representative independent claim 1 is directed to a virtualized server computing system that operates in an unconventional manner using non-generic hardware and software components to perform an ordered combination of operations in a virtualized environment. Such ordered combination of operations should eliminate the asserted broad interpretation by the Office that the claimed invention "could practically be performed in the human mind." Indeed, the ordered combination of operations by a virtual machine goes well beyond simple human decision-making and involves specific technological steps that enhance server-client device communications. Here, the eligibility of representative independent claim 1 is self-evident insofar as it clearly does not seek to tie up all forms of organizing user settings.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
	Contrary to the remarks, it is important for applicant to note while preemption may signal patent ineligible subject matter, the absence of complete preemption does not demonstrate patent eligibility. Questions on preemption are inherent in and resolved by the 101 analysis.  Accordingly, when the claimed invention is considered as a whole, the limitations do not define a specific technological improvement. Instead, the claimed invention recites the steps necessary to perform the abstract ideas. The specification is silent as to any specific structural or inventive improvements in computer functionality related to the claimed system. Providing general descriptions of computer components does not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. For these reasons, the rejections under 101 are being maintained.

Applicant further argues “Disputed Claims Represent an Improvement to a Technological Field Regarding whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception under Eligibility Step 2A analysis, §2106.04(d) of the MPEP establishes that a claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application is patent eligible. Indeed, §2106.04(d)(1) of the MPEP establishes that: "A claim reciting a judicial exception is not directed to the judicial exception if it also recites additional elements demonstrating that the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. One way to demonstrate such integration is when the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field." Applicant respectfully maintains that the technical features recited in the disputed claims as presently presented qualify as "significantly more" inasmuch as they provide for an improvement to the functioning of computing technology. For example, as noted supra, the specification at ¶ [0122] recites "[t]he benefits of computer virtualization have been recognized as greatly increasing the computational efficiency and flexibility of a computing hardware platform." Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the rejected claims reside firmly outside the scope of what the USPTO considers organizing human activity. Indeed, the disputed claims as presently presented incorporate specific, non-generic hardware and software components other than what is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field as well as other meaningful technical features beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The claims include technical features that encompasses significantly more than the alleged judicial exception itself, and thus, include patent-eligible subject matter.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. 
 	Contrary to the remarks, the claimed invention remains ineligible under Step 2A Prong Two of the two-part analysis. In the instant case, the cited passage ¶ [0122] from the applicant’s specification has been considered, however, the benefits of computer virtualization are discussed at a high-level of generality which does not lead towards eligibility. The specification merely confirms the generic nature of the computer components that perform the recited method. It is important for applicant to note, the courts have previously held  "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015) – See MPEP 2106.05(f). For these reasons, the rejections under 101 are being maintained.
With Respect to Rejections Under 35 USC 102
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.

Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EHRIN PRATT whose telephone number is (571)270-3184. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at 571-272-6782. 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.


/EHRIN L PRATT/Examiner, Art Unit 3629                                                                                                                                                                                                        
/LAURA YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629