Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 7477
`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 7477
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(cid:3)
`(cid:40)(cid:59)(cid:43)(cid:44)(cid:37)(cid:44)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:22)(cid:3)
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 2 of 16 PageID #: 7478
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TIRADEMAIRK OFFICE
`
`Scrial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 109633819
`PATENT
`
`In re application of: Malcolm K. Beyer, Jr.
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`
`Filed: November 26, 2008
`
`Entitled: METHOD OF UTILIZING
`FORCED ALERTS FOR
`INTERACTiVE REMOTE
`COMMUNTCATIONS
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Confirmation No: 9036
`
`Group Art Unit: 2617
`
`Examiner: LEBASSI, Arnanuel
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 223 13-1450
`
`December 17. 2010
`
`Filed Electronically
`
`RESPONSE AND AMENDMENT
`
`Dear Sir:
`
`Tu response to the Office Action dated September 20, 2010, please amend the above
`
`referenced patent application as follows and consider the remarks below. This Response is
`
`believed to be timely. However, in the event that any further extension of time is required, please
`
`consider this a request therefor. The Commissioner is authorized to charge any additional fees
`
`due or credit any overpayment to Deposit Account 1 3-1 130.
`
`Please amend the claims as shown on pages 2-7.
`
`Remarks begin on page 8.
`
`AGISTX_00001 268
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 3 of 16 PageID #: 7479
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`CLAIM AMENDMENTS
`
`Please amend the claims (strikethrough indicating deletion and underline indicating
`
`insertion) as follows:
`
`i.
`
`2.
`
`(Cancelled)
`
`(Currently Amended)
`
`A communication system for transmitting.
`
`receiving,
`
`confirming receipt. and responding to an electronic message, comprising:
`
`a predetermined network of participants. wherein each participant has a similarly
`
`equipped PC or PDA/cell phone that includes a CPU and a touch screen display a CPU and
`
`memory;
`
`a data transmission means that facilitates the transmission of electronic flies between said
`
`PCs and said PDA/cell phones in different locations;
`
`a sender PC or PDA/ceii phone and at least one recipient PC or PDA/celi phone for each
`
`electronic message; nd
`
`a forced message alert software application program loaded on each participating PC or
`
`PDAJce11 phone [.1
`
`means for attaching a forced message alert software packet to a voice or text message
`
`creating a forced message alert that is transmitted by said sender PC or PDA/cell phone to the
`
`recipient PC or PDA/cell phone, wherein said forced message alert software packet contains
`
`containing a response list and requires requfring the forced message alert software on said
`
`recipient PC or PDA/ceil phone to transmit an automatic acknowledgment to the sender PC or
`
`2
`
`AGISTX_00001269
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 4 of 16 PageID #: 7480
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`PDA/cell phone as soon as said forced message alert is received by the recipient PC or PDA/cell
`
`phone;
`
`means for receiving and displaying a listing of which recipient PCs or PDA/cell phones
`
`have automatically acknowledged the forced message aziert
`
`itt and which recipient PCs or
`
`PDAJce11 phones have not automatically acknowledged the forced message alert;
`
`means for periodically resending said forced message alert to said recipient PCs or
`
`PDAJce11 phones that have not automatically acknowledged the forced message alert; and
`
`means for receiving and displaying a listing of which recipient PCs or PDA/ceil phones
`
`have transmitted a manual response to said forced message alert and details the response from
`
`each recipient PC or PDA/celi phone that responded.
`
`3 .
`
`(Currently Amended) The system as in claim 4- 2 , wherein the forced message
`
`alert software application program on the recipient PC or PDA/ceil phone includes:
`
`means for transmitting the acknowledgment of receipt to said sender PC or PDA/cell
`
`phone immediately upon receiving a forced message alert from the sender PC or PDA/ceil
`
`phone;
`
`means for controlling of the recipient PC or PDA/ceil phone upon transmitting said
`
`automatic acknowledgment and caue causing, in cases where the force message alert is a text
`
`message, the text message and a response list to be shown on the display of the recipient PC or
`
`PDAJce11 phone or causes, in cases where the force message alert is a voice message, the voice
`
`message te-be being periodically repeated by the speakers of the recipient PC or PDA/cell phone
`
`while said response list is shown on the display;
`
`3
`
`AGISTX_00001270
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 5 of 16 PageID #: 7481
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`means for allowing a maiïual response to be manually selected from the response list or
`
`manually recorded and transmits transmitting said manual response to the sender PC or PDA/ceil
`
`phone; and
`
`means for clearing the text message and a response list from the display of the recipient
`
`PC or PDA/cell phone or
`
`ep stopping the repeating voice message and clears clearing the
`
`response list from the display of the recipient PC or PDA/celi phone once the manual response is
`
`transmitted.
`
`4.
`
`(Currently Amended)
`
`The system as in claim 4-
`
`, wherein said data transmission
`
`means is TCP/IP or another communications protocol.
`
`5. (Currently Amended)
`
`The system as in claim I-
`
`, wherein the response list that is
`
`transmitted within the forced message alert software packet is a default response list that is
`
`embedded in the forced message alert software application program.
`
`6.
`
`(Currently Amended)
`
`The system as in claim 2, wherein the response list that is
`
`transmitted within the forced message alert software packet is a custom response list that is
`
`created at the time the specific forced message alert is created on the sender PC or PDA/cell
`
`phone.
`
`7 .
`
`(Currently Amended)
`
`A method of sending a forced message alert to one or more
`
`recipient PCs or PDA/ceil phones within a predetermined communication network, wherein the
`
`receipt and response to said forced message alert by each intended recipient PC or PDA/cell
`
`phone is tracked, said method comprising the steps of:
`
`accessing a forced message alert software application program on a sender PC or
`
`PDAIceli phone;
`
`4
`
`AGISTX_00001271
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 6 of 16 PageID #: 7482
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`creating the forced message alert on said sender PC or PDA/cell phone by attaching a
`
`voice or text message to a forced message alert application software packet to said voice or text
`
`message;
`
`designating one or more recipient PCs or PDA/cell phones in the communication
`
`network;
`
`electronically transmitting the forced message alert to said recipient PCs or PDA/cell
`
`phones;
`
`receiving automatic acknowledgements from the recipient PCs or PDA/cell phones that
`
`received the message and displaying a listing of which recipient PCs or PDA/cell phones have
`
`acknowledged receipt of the forced message alert and which recipient PCs or PDA/celI phones
`
`have not acknowledged receipt of the forced message alert;
`
`periodically resending the forced message alert to the recipient PCs or PDA/cell phones
`
`that have not acknowledged receipt;
`
`receiving responses to the forced message alert from the recipient PCs or PDA/cell
`
`phones and displaying the response from each recipient PC or PDAJcell phone; and
`
`providing a manual response list on the display of the recipient PC or PDA/cell phone;
`
`clearing the receiver's display screen or causing the repeating voice alert to cease upon
`
`selecting a response that can only be cleared by manually selecting and transmitting a response
`
`to the manual response list.
`
`8.
`
`(Original) The method as in claim 7, wherein each PC or PDA/cell phone within a
`
`predetermined communication network is similarly equipped and has the forced message alert
`
`software application program loaded on it.
`
`5
`
`AGISTX_00001272
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 7 of 16 PageID #: 7483
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`9.
`
`(Original) The method as in claim 7, wherein said forced message alert application
`
`software packet contains a response list, wherein said response list is a default list embedded in
`
`the forced message alert software application program.
`
`io.
`
`(Original) The method as in claim 7, wherein said forced message alert application
`
`software packet contains a response list, wherein said response list is a custom response list that
`
`is created at the time the specific forced message alert is created on the sender PC or PDA/ceil
`
`phone.
`
`i i .
`
`(Currently Amended) A method of receiving, acknowledging and responding to a
`
`forced message alert from a sender PC or PDAJce11 phone to a recipient PC or PDA/cell phone,
`
`wherein the receipt, acknowledgment, and response to said forced message alert is forced by a
`
`forced message alert software application program, said method comprising the steps of:
`
`receiving an electronically transmitted electronic message;
`
`identifying said electronic message as a forced message alert, wherein said forced
`
`message alert consists comprises of a voice or text message and a forced message alert
`
`application software packet, which triggers the activation of the forced message alert software
`
`application program within the recipient PC or PDA/ceil phone;
`
`transmitting an automatic acknowledgment of receipt to the sender PC or PDA/cell
`
`phone, which triggers the forced message alert software application program to take control of
`
`the recipient PC or PDA/cell phone and show the content of the text message and a response list
`
`on the display recipient PC or PDA/celi phone or to repeat audibly the content of the voice
`
`message on the speakers of the recipient PC or PDA/cell phone and show the response list on the
`
`display recipient PC or PDA/celi phone; and
`
`6
`
`AGISTX_00001273
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 8 of 16 PageID #: 7484
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`transmitting a selected response, whether said selected response is a chosen option from
`
`tile response list, causing the forced message alert software to release control of the recipient PC
`
`or PDA/cell phone and stop showing the content of the text message and a response list on the
`
`display recipient PC or PDA/cell phone and or stop repeating the content of the voice message
`
`on the speakers of the recipient PC or PDA/cell phone;
`
`displaying the response received from the PC or PDA cell phone that transmitted the
`
`response on the sender of the forced alert PC or PDAJcell phone; and
`
`providing a list of the recipient PC or PDA/celi phones have automatically acknowledged
`
`receipt of a forced alert message and their response to the forced alert message.
`
`12.
`
`(Original) The method as in claim il, wherein each PC or PDAIceII phone within a
`
`predetermined communication network is similarly equipped and has the forced message alert
`
`software application program loaded on it.
`
`13.
`
`(Original) The method as in claim ii, wherein said forced message alert application
`
`software packet contains a response list, wherein said response list is a default list embedded in
`
`the forced message alert software application program.
`
`14.
`
`(Original) T he method as in claim i i, wherein said forced message alert application
`
`software packet contains a response list, wherein said response list is a custom response list that
`
`is created at the time the specific forced message alert is created on the sender PC or PDA/celI
`
`phone
`
`7
`
`AGISTX_00001274
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 9 of 16 PageID #: 7485
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`REMARKS
`
`The Office Action mailed September 20, 2010 has been received and reviewed. By the
`
`present Response and Amendment, Claim i is canceled. Claims 2-7 and i i have been amended
`
`and claims 2-14 remain. No new matter is introduced.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`The Examiners rejection of Claims 1, 4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
`
`anticipated by Keating et al. ([JS 2004/0082352) is respectfully traversed. It is elementary patent
`
`law that to sustain a rejection based on anticipation, each and every element recited in the claims
`
`that are rejected must be present in the reference cited by the Examiner. Claim i has been
`
`canceled. Remaining claims 4 and 6 have been amended to depend from amended claim 2. The
`
`Keating et al. patent is very specific about being a system and method to develop accurate billing
`
`for Push To Talk (PTT) phones. The described technique sets up a group of mobile stations
`
`based on digital replies automatically received from the group of mobile stations . Applicant' s
`
`invention is about sending commands to individuals using any communications means that
`
`require a manual response from the individual to whom the command was issued, in much the
`
`same manner that when a U.S. Marine issues a command and he demands a "Yes Sir" or "No
`
`Sir" response from the person to whom the command was issued. Additionally, there is no use of
`
`remote or automatically generated voice commands that demand a response being sent in
`
`Keating et al. The Keating et al, reference does not disclose a forced message alert software
`
`application program loaded on each participating PC or PDAIceli phone as required in amended
`
`independent claim 2 from which claims 4 and 6 depend. The system in the Keating et al.
`
`reference is completely different in purpose and methodology and in other words structure and
`
`AGISTX_00001275
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 10 of 16 PageID #: 7486
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`function. The purpose of the system in the Keating et al. reference is to enable accurate billing of
`
`multiple call participants in a wireless group. There is no discussion or suggestion in Keating et
`
`al. to provide a forced message alert which is described in Applicant's specification. The
`
`Examiner states in the rejection that "Keating et al. discloses a forced message alert software
`
`application program loaded on each participating PC in paragraph (0025)". A review of
`
`paragraph (0025) of the Keating et al. reference shows that the leader sends a message to a
`
`wireless data controller that requests a list of participants that have responded that want to
`
`participate in a group cali. This is not the forced message alert as described in applicant's
`
`specification and recited in amended claim 2. In the Keating et al. reference if there is no
`
`response then the recipient is not added to the group. Applicant's forced message alert forces a
`
`recipient to respond with an appropriate predetermined response. Again, the whole purpose of
`
`the Keating et ai. invention is to make sure that there is an accurate billing among the receipt
`
`members . See paragraph (0005) of Keating et al. ;
`
`the Keating et al. reference does not anticipate
`
`amended claim 2 from which claims 4 and 6 depend and therefore claims 4 and 6 are allowable.
`
`Claim Rejections -35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`The Examiner's rejection of Claims 2, 3 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Keating et ai. (US 2004/0082352) in view of Esler et ai. (US 2005/0241026)
`
`is respectfully traversed. As stated above, with respect to the Keating et aL reference, the
`
`structure, methodology, and purpose of the Keating et al. reference are completely different than
`
`those in Applicant's claimed invention. Applicant's Claim 2 has been amended to distinguish the
`
`forced message alert. Esler et al. shows a device and method for storing data message alerts on
`
`medical devices. The medical device can be interrogated with a programmer. The method in
`
`9
`
`AGISTX_00001276
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 11 of 16 PageID #: 7487
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`Esler's patent is the reverse of Applicant's patent claims. th the Esler patent, the individuals
`
`automatically provide unsolicited data to a remote computer which periodically polis for health
`
`data. There is no command sent to the participant to manually respond. There is no voice
`
`command involved. The method may also include communicating the data message alert by the
`
`programmer in response to detecting the data message alert stored in a dedicated alert field of a
`
`medical device. It is difficult to understand how a person of ordinary skill in the art that deals
`
`with the communication network that has forced message alerts would even consider the
`
`combination of device and method disclosed in the Keating et al. reference in conjunction with
`
`the method disclosed in Esler et al, since the two methods and systems are completely different
`
`and offer no suggestion or motivation to arrive at Applicant's claimed invention. It is Applicant's
`
`position that even if one combined or attempted to combine the method and systems described in
`
`Keating et al. with the method and systems described in Esier et al., one would not arrive at
`
`Applicant' s claimed invention. Since the references even if combined do not provide a prima
`
`facie obviousness rejection of these claims, it is Applicant' s position that these claims are
`
`allowable over the references cited by the examiner.
`
`The Examiner's rejection of Claims 7 - 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Keating et ai. (US 2004/0082352) in view of Dalton et al, (US 2004/0192365)
`
`is respectfully traversed. Applicant hereby asserts the arguments made above as to why Keating
`
`et al. is not an appropriate reference with respect to Applicant' s claimed invention and claims 7
`
`through 14. Applicant's claim 7 has been amended to include the steps of providing a manual
`
`response list on the display of the recipient PC/PDA and providing that clearing of the receiver' s
`
`display screen in order to get the alert to cease can only be cleared by manually selecting and
`
`transmitting a response to the manual response list. Additionally, there is no use of remote or
`
`io
`
`AGISTX_00001277
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 12 of 16 PageID #: 7488
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`automatically generated voice commands that demand a response being sent in Dalton et al. The
`
`steps are not taught or suggested in the references when viewed together cited by the Examiner.
`
`Dalton et al. shows a communications system and method that includes a data concentrator
`
`computer and a gateway device that allows direct communication between first and second
`
`mobile data acquisition devices. Again, it is Applicant' s position that even if the method and
`
`reference device shown in Keating et al. were somehow to be combined with the system and
`
`method shown in Dalton et aL, Applicant's claimed invention cannot result based on the
`
`amendments to claim 7. Therefore, the Examiner has failed to present a prima facie case of
`
`obviousness under 35 [J.S.C. § 103 with respect to claim 7. Therefore. it is Applicant's position
`
`that claims 7-14 are allowable over the art of record.
`
`Claim i is canceled. Claims 2 through 14 are believed allowable over the art record for
`
`the reasons stated above.
`
`i i
`
`AGISTX_00001278
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 13 of 16 PageID #: 7489
`
`Serial No.: 12/324,122
`Attorney Docket No.: 10963.3819
`IATENT
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`In view of the amendments submitted herein and the above comments, it is believed that all
`
`grounds of rejection are overcome and that the application has now been placed hi full condition
`
`for allowance. Accordingly, Applicant earnestly solicits early and favorable action. Should there
`
`be any further questions or reservations, the Examiner is urged to telephone Applicant's
`
`undersigned attorney at (954) 763-3303.
`
`Respectfully submitted.
`
`s/ Barry L. Haley
`Barry L. Haley, Esq. (Reg. No. 25,339)
`
`Customer No. : 22235
`MALIN HALEY DiMAGGIO
`BOWEN & LHOTA, P.A.
`i 936 South Andrews Avenue
`Fortj Lauderdale, Florida 33316
`Telephone: (954) 763-3303
`Facsimile: (954) 522-6507
`E-Mail: jJ3fQ.Ilhp.t.çqp..
`
`I:\1 0000\10963\38 19\To PTO\O iResponse co OA Mailed 09-20-1 O.doc
`
`12
`
`AGISTX_00001279
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 14 of 16 PageID #: 7490
`
`Electronic Acknowledgement Receipt
`
`EFS ID:
`
`Application Number:
`
`9059437
`
`12324122
`
`International Application Number:
`
`Confirmation Number:
`
`9036
`
`.
`
`Title of Invention:
`
`.
`
`METHOD OF UTILIZING FORCED ALERTS FOR INTERACTIVE REMOTE
`COMMUNICATIONS
`
`First Named Inventor/Applicant Name:
`
`Malcolm K. Beyer
`
`Customer Number:
`
`22235
`
`Filer:
`
`Barry Lee Haley/Amy Allen
`
`Filer Authorized By:
`
`Barry Lee Haley
`
`Attorney Docket Number:
`
`10963.3819
`
`Receipt Date:
`
`Filing Date:
`
`Time Stamp:
`
`17-DEC-2010
`
`26-NOV-2008
`
`11:08:29
`
`Application Type:
`
`Utility under 35 USC 111(a)
`
`Payment information:
`
`Submitted with Payment
`
`no
`
`File Listing:
`
`Document
`Number
`
`i
`
`Document Description
`
`File Name
`
`File Size(Bytes)/
`Message Digest
`
`Multi
`Pages
`Part /.zip (if appi.)
`
`05_RespToOAMailedO9-20-1 0,
`pdf
`
`63928
`
`42
`
`yes
`
`i 2
`
`AGISTX_00001280
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 15 of 16 PageID #: 7491
`
`Multipart Description/PDF files in .zip description
`
`Document Description
`
`Start
`
`End
`
`Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject
`
`Claims
`
`Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in n Amendment
`
`i
`
`2
`
`8
`
`i
`
`7
`
`i 2
`
`Warnings:
`
`I nfo rmati on:
`
`Total Files Size (in bytes)
`
`63928
`
`This Acknowledgement Receipt evidences receipt on the noted date by the USPTO ofthe indicated documents,
`characterized by the applicant, and including page counts, where applicable. lt serves as evidence of receipt similar to a
`Post Card, as described in MPEP 503.
`New ADplications Under 35 U.S.C. i il
`Ifa new application is being filed and the application includes the necessary components for a filing date (see 37 CFR
`1.53(b)-(d)and MPEP 506), a Filing Receipt (37 CFR 1.54)will be issued in due course and the date shown on this
`Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the filing date ofthe application.
`
`National Stage of an International ApDlication under 35 U.S.C. 371
`Ifa timely submission to enter the national stage ofan international application is compliant with the conditions of 35
`U.S.C. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/DO/EO/903 indicating acceptance of the application as a
`national stage submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt, in due course.
`
`New International Application Filed with the USPTO as a Receiving Office
`Ifa new international application is being filed and the international application includes the necessary components for
`an international filing date (see PCI Article i i and MPEP 1 81 0), a Notification of the International Application Number
`and of the International Filing Date (Form PCT/RO/1 05) will be issued in due course, subject to prescriptions concerning
`national security, and the date shown on this Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the international filing date of
`the application.
`
`AGISTX_00001281
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00513-JRG Document 175-14 Filed 08/14/18 Page 16 of 16 PageID #: 7492
`
`PTO(SB!06 (07-06)
`Approved for use through 1/31/2007. 0MB 0651-0032
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`Under the Paoerwork Reduction Act of 1995. no oursons are reciuired to resoond to a collection of information unless it disolavs a valid 0MB control number.
`Application or Docket Number
`PATENT APPLICATION FEE DETERMINATION RECORD
`Filing Date
`11/26/2008
`12/324,122
`Substitute for Form PTO-875
`
`D To be Mailed
`
`I
`
`APPLICATION AS FILED - PART I
`(Column 1)
`
`(Column 2)
`
`SMALL ENTITY
`
`OR
`
`OTHER THAN
`SMALL ENTITY
`
`FOR
`
`NUMBER FILED
`
`NUMBER EXTRA
`
`RATE ($)
`
`FEE ($)
`
`RATE ($)
`
`FEE ($)
`
`(37 0FR I . 6(k),_(i)._er_(a))
`
`137 CFR_1.lela),_b)_er_(u))
`
`D BASICFEE
`D SEARCH FEE
`D EXAMINATION FEE
`(37 CFFt_1.161e),_(P)_er_(q))
`TOTAL CLAIMS
`(37 CFR tlE)i))
`INDEPENDENT CLAIMS
`tle)h))
`(37 C
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`minus 20 S
`
`minus 3 =
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`X S
`
`X f
`
`=
`
`=
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`OR
`
`X $
`
`X $
`
`DAPPLICATION SIZE FEE
`(37 CFFt 1.16(u))
`
`I/the specification anu drawings exceed 100
`sheets of paper, the application size fee due
`$250 ($1 25 for small entity) for each
`additional 50 sheets or fraction thereof. See
`35 U.S.C. 41 (a)(1 ((G) and 37 CFR 1.16(s).
`
`D MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM PRESENT (37 CFN t 16))))
`
`If thu difference in column I is less than zero, enter '0" in column 2.
`
`TOTAL
`
`TOTAL
`
`APPLICATION AS AMENDED - PART II
`
`-
`
`12/17/2010
`
`Total (37 CFR
`
`(Column 1)
`
`CLAIMS
`REMAINING
`AFTER
`AMENDMENT
`
`(Column2)
`
`(Column3)
`
`SMALL ENTITY
`
`OR
`
`OTHER THAN
`SMALL ENTITY
`
`HIGHEST
`NUMBER
`PREVIOUSLY
`PAID FOR
`
`-
`
`PRESENT
`EXTRA
`
`RATE ($)
`
`ADDITIONAL
`FEE ($)
`
`RATE ($)
`
`ADDITIONAL
`FEE ($)
`
`X S
`
`=
`
`I-
`z
`Ui
`o
`z Independent
`Ui
`
`.16I1II
`
`137 CFR Ll6(hI)
`
`3
`
`3
`
`Minus
`
`20
`
`Minus
`
`***3
`
`= O
`
`= O
`
`Application Size Fee (37 CFR I .16(s))
`
`EI FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM 37 CFR 1.16))))
`
`-
`
`-
`
`I-
`z Total (370FR
`Independent
`o137 CFR i.l$(hI)
`
`l.lffflI
`
`Lii
`
`(Column 1)
`
`CLAIMS
`REMAINING
`AFTER
`AMENDMENT
`
`(Column 2)
`
`(Column 3)
`
`-
`
`Minus
`
`HIGHEST
`NUMBER
`PREVIOUSLY
`PAID FOR
`
`=
`
`Minus
`
`**
`
`PRESENT
`EXTRA
`
`RATE ($)
`
`ADDITIONAL
`FEE ($)
`
`RATE ($)
`
`ADDITIONAL
`FEE ($)
`
`X $26
`
`X $1 10 =
`
`TOTAL
`ADD'L
`FEE
`
`O
`
`O
`
`O
`
`-OR
`
`OR
`
`X S
`
`=
`
`- TOTAL
`
`OR
`
`OR
`
`ADD'L
`FEE
`
`X $
`
`x$
`
`TOTAL
`ADDL
`FEE
`
`OR
`
`OR
`
`OR
`
`OR
`
`X $
`
`X$
`
`TOTAL
`ADDL
`FEE
`
`Application Size Fee
`
`(37
`
`CFR I
`
`.16(s))
`
`FIRST PRESCNTATION OF MULTIFLE DEFENDCNT CLAIM 37 CFR 1.16))))
`
`,=S
`
`'r Ifthe entry in column I is Iessthan the entry in column 2, write 0' in column 3.
`'S If the Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 20, enter "20".
`If the Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 3, enter 3".
`The "Highest Number Previously Paid For" (Total or Independent) is the highest numberfound in the appropriate box in column 1.
`This collection of information is required by 37 CFR I .16. The information is required to obtain or retain a benefit by the public which is to file (and by the USPTO to
`process) an application. Confidentiality is governed by 35 U.S.C. 122 and 37 CFFf I .14. This collection is estimated to take 12 minutes to complete,including gathering,
`preparing, and submitting the completed application forni fo the USPTO. Time will vary depending upon the individual case. Any comments on the amount oftime you
`require to complete this form and/or suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, U.S.
`Department of Commerce, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. DO NOT SEND FEES OR COMPLETED FORMS TO THIS
`ADDRESS. SEND TO: Commis8ioner for PatenLs, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 2231 3-1450.
`(fyou need assistance in completing the form, ca/f 1-8OO-PTO-919 and select option 2.
`
`LegaI Instrument Examiner:
`(STANLEY JORDAN/
`
`AGISTX_00001282
`
`