Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 40-3 Filed 04/18/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1086
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 40-3 Filed 04/18/24 Page 1 of 2 PagelD #: 1086
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 40-3 Filed 04/18/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1087
`Case 2:23-cv-00059-JRG Document 40-3 Filed 04/18/24 Page 2 of 2 PagelD #: 1087
`
`.
`_.
`.
`Examiner-Initiated Interview Summary
`
`13/245,001
`STROBER, DAVID
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`JOHN HEFFINGTON
`
`2172
`
`All participants (applicant, applicant’s representative, PTO personnel):
`
`(1) JOHN HEFFINGTON.
`
`(2) Samuel Borodach.
`
`Date of Interview: 77 July 2012.
`
`(3) David Strober.
`
`(4)
`
`.
`
`
`
`Type:
`
`[-] Video Conference
`[X Telephonic
`[-] Personal [copy given to:[] applicant
`
`[J] applicant’s representative]
`
`Exhibit shown or demonstration conducted:
`If Yes, brief description:
`
`[] Yes
`
`IX] No.
`
`[101 [112 (kl102 (103 [Others
`Issues Discussed
`(For each of the checked box(es) above, please describe below the issue and detailed description of the discussion)
`
`Claim(s) discussed: 7,12 and 23.
`
`Identification of prior art discussed: Schwartz.
`
`Substance of Interview
`(For each issue discussed, provide a detailed description and indicate if agreement was reached. Some topics may include: identification or clarification of a
`reference or a portion thereof, claim interpretation, proposed amendments, arguments of any applied referencesetc...)
`
`The inventor explained the inventive concept of the invention. The examiner, the inventor and the inventor’s attorney
`discussed claim amendments that could overcome the prior art of record and place the claims in condition for
`allowance. The examiner stated that he would have to perform an updated search for any new amendmentsto the
`claims..
`
`Applicantrecordation instructions:
`
`It is not necessary for applicant to provide a separate record of the substanceofinterview.
`
`Examinerrecordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substance of any interview of record. A complete and proper recordation of
`the substance of an interview should includethe items listed in MPEP 713.04 for complete and proper recordation including the identification of the
`general thrust of each argumentor issue discussed, a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed regarding patentability and the
`general results or outcomeof the interview, to include an indication as to whether or not agreement was reached on the issuesraised.
`
`[] Attachment
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2172 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`/Boris Pesin/
`
`PTOL-413B (Rev. 8/11/2010)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper No. 20120728
`
`