`“x
`‘\\f
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`11/680,452
`
`02/28/2007
`
`Chuck Jennings
`
`406855
`
`5285
`
`03/27/2017 —POLSINELLIPC m
`
`7590
`27148
`
`
`BLA <’ DOUGLAS B
`900 WEST 48TH PLACE
`SUITE 900
`KANSAS CITY, MO 64112-1895
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`2442
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/27/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`uspt @polsinelli.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 11/680,452 JENNINGS ET AL.
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`DOUGLAS BLAIR its“ 2442
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 1/5/2017.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`2a)|Z| This action is FINAL.
`3)|:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 6-35 and 41-128 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)|:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 6-35 and 41- 128 is/are rejected.
`
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`* If any)claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`
`
`()
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`
`
`hit z/thvvvtlsnto. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`iindex.‘s orsend an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:l The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)|:l objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20170321
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre—AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/2017 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive.
`
`Eyal streams media content segments from each resource that is referenced by the URL’s
`
`that are part of the playlist. Eyal may teach that a playlist is sent to the user, which the examiner
`
`agrees is not streaming, but Eyal also teaches streaming each media content segment referenced
`
`in the playlist from the resource referenced by the resource at the URL identified in the playlist.
`
`This interpretation reads on the breadth of the claims. The claims send “an indication of the
`
`media content segment” to the communication device and then the communication device
`
`communicates with a resource to obtain the stream. Eyal is doing exactly what the applicant is
`
`claiming. Each URL in the playlist is the claimed indication. The URL is information
`
`instructing the communication device how to communicate with each of the plurality of
`
`resources (server at URL) to cause the media content segment to be streamed. Notice that the
`
`claims do not stipulate whether each “indication of media content” is sent individually or as part
`
`of a playlist. The indications could be part of a playlist according to the breadth of the
`
`applicant’s claims.
`
`As to the newly amended limitations, the Examiner has considered these limitations and
`
`found them not to be patentable over the combination of Eyal and Hedge. Newly revised
`
`rejections are provided with new citations.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claims 107 and 108 are objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`they refer to
`
`the “system” of claim 6 instead of the “method”. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre—AIA 35 USC. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art
`are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made
`to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not
`be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`Claims 6, 17-19, 22, 24-27, 41, 52-55, 59-62, 79-88, 93-102, 107-116, and 122-124
`
`is/are rejected under pre—AIA 35 USC. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US. Patent Number
`
`6,389,467 to Eyal in view of US. Patent Application Publication Number 2002/0007418 by
`
`Hedge.
`
`As to claim 6, Eyal teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a management system Via
`
`a communication network and from a communication device, a request associated with a user of
`
`the communication device to have media content streamed to the communication device, the
`
`requested media content comprising a plurality of media content segments (col. 19, line 48-col.
`
`20, line 14), and the management system comprising a combination of hardware and software
`
`(Figure 4, search request 203 and col. 19, lines 30-35 and 41-44); and for each one of the
`
`plurality of media content segments, (i) determining, by the management system, a plurality of
`
`resources (Figure 19, the media sites are resources) available to facilitate streaming the media
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`content segment to the communication device (col. 14, lines 50-60 describes a process of
`
`determining Whether the media sites corresponding to the URL are “available to facilitate
`
`streaming”); and (ii) transmitting, from the management system to the communication device,
`
`an indication of the media content segment segment (col. 19, lines 38-40) and information
`
`instructing the communication device identifying how to communicate with each of the plurality
`
`of resources to cause the media content segment to be streamed to the communication device
`
`(col. 20, lines 39-45) in accordance with at least one rule associated with the requested media
`
`content to control how the plurality of media content segments are to be streamed to the
`
`communication device (col. 15, lines 37-65) and an attribute of the communication device (col.
`
`19, lines 41-44 and col. 20, lines 23-29, the parameter); however Eyal does not explicitly teach
`
`that the media content segment is to be streamed to the communication device in accordance
`
`with at least one rule associated with a capability of the communication device.
`
`Hedge teaches a method for streaming media content segments to a communication
`
`device in accordance with at least one rule associated with a capability of the communication
`
`device (paragraphs 63-66 and Figure 6).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention
`
`to combine the teachings of Eyal regarding distributing content segments to client devices with
`
`the teachings of Hedge regarding streaming according to a rule associated with a capability of a
`
`client device because doing so allows for a better client experience (see teachings of Hedge) and
`
`Eyal already tracks the capabilities of the user device (see col. 13, line 46—col. 14, line 9) so
`
`implementing the teachings of Hedge in the system of Eyal will not require substantial
`
`modification of Eyal in order to be viable.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`As to claim 41, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 6.
`
`As to claims 107 and 109, col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 108 and 110, col. 11, lines 31—37.
`
`As to claim 79, Eyal teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a management system
`
`via a communication network and from a communication device, a request associated with a user
`
`of the communication device to have media content streamed to the communication device, the
`
`requested media content comprising a plurality of media content segments (col. 19, line 48-col.
`
`20, line 14) and the management system comprising a combination of hardware and software
`
`(Figure 4, search request 203 and col. 19, lines 30-35 and 41-44); for each one of the plurality
`
`of media content segments, (i) determining, by the management system, a plurality of resources
`
`(Figure 19, the media sites are resources) other than the management system available to
`
`facilitate streaming of the media content segment to the communication device (col. 14, lines 50-
`
`60 describes a process of determining Whether the media sites corresponding to the URL
`
`are “available to facilitate streaming”); and (ii) transmitting, from the management system to
`
`the communication device, an identification the media content segment (col. 19, lines 38-40) and
`
`information instructing the communication device how to communicate with each of the plurality
`
`of resources to cause the media content segments to be streamed to the communication device
`
`(col. 20, lines 39-45); in accordance with at least one rule associated with the requested media
`
`content to control how the plurality of media content segments are to be streamed to the
`
`communication device (col. 15, lines 37-65) and an attribute of the communication device (col.
`
`19, lines 41-44 and col. 20, lines 23-29, the parameter); however Eyal does not explicitly teach
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`that the media content segment is to be streamed to the communication deVice in accordance
`
`with at least one rule associated with a capability of the communication deVice.
`
`Hedge teaches a method for streaming media content segments to a communication
`
`deVice in accordance with at least one rule associated with a capability of the communication
`
`device (paragraphs 63-66 and Figure 6).
`
`It would have been obVious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention
`
`to combine the teachings of Eyal regarding distributing content segments to client deVices with
`
`the teachings of Hedge regarding streaming according to a rule associated with a capability of a
`
`client deVice because doing so allows for a better client experience (see teachings of Hedge) and
`
`Eyal already tracks the capabilities of the user deVice (see col. 13, line 46—col. 14, line 9) so
`
`implementing the teachings of Hedge in the system of Eyal will not require substantial
`
`modification of Eyal in order to be Viable.
`
`As to claim 93, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 79.
`
`As to claims 17 and 52, see col. 26, lines 19—32.
`
`As to claims 18 and 53, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 19 and 54, see Figure 19.
`
`As to claims 22, 57, 86 and 100, see col. 9, lines 5—12, the multiple sites described by
`
`Eyal would qualify as a routing processor. The applicant does not explicitly limit the definition
`
`of a routing processor.
`
`As to claims 24 and 59, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`As to claims 25, 26, 60, and 61, see col. 12, lines 64—67.
`
`As to claims 27 and 62, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 80, 81, 94, and 95, see col. 13, lines 1—8.
`
`As to claims 82 and 96, media player clearly receives a format that it can use to retrieve
`
`the media.
`
`As to claims 83 and 97, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 84 and 98, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 85 and 99, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 87, 88, 101, and 102, see Figure 11 and corresponding text.
`
`As to claims 111 and 113, see col. 19, lines 30—54.
`
`As to claims 112 and 114, see col. 11, lines 31—37.
`
`As to claims 115—117 and 122—124, see col. 13, lines 1—8.
`
`Claims 7—14, 16, 42—49, 51, 118—121, and 125—128 are rejected under pre—AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) as being unpatentable over US. Patent Number 6,389,467 to Eyal in View of US. Patent
`
`Application Publication Number 2002/0007418 by Hedge in further View of US. Patent Number
`
`5,758,257 to Herz et al.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`As to claims 7 and 42, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims
`
`79 and 93 however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach the use of a viewer
`
`profile to generate the identification for the plurality of portions of the media.
`
`Herz teaches a method and system for delivering media to a user comprising using a
`
`viewer profile to generate identification of a plurality of portions of media (Figures 1 and 2).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Herz regarding using a viewer profile to select media because
`
`using a viewer profile would enhance the selection based on search results used by Eyal without
`
`modifying the inventive concept of Eyal.
`
`As to claim 8, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims 79;
`
`however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach selecting other media based upon
`
`a viewer profile.
`
`Herz teaches a method of selecting other media to be included in a presentation
`
`comprising selecting, based on upon a viewer profile, other media, wherein the other media is
`
`not requested by the user of the communication device to be streamed to the communication
`
`device and transmitting the other media to the communication device (col. 47, line 2l—col. 48,
`
`line 22).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant’s
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Herz regarding adding other media to a presentation because
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`doing so can generate revenue through advertising for the media provider. Eyal does suggest the
`
`insertion of commercials (see col. 13, lines 1—8).
`
`As to claim 43, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 8.
`
`As to claims 9, 10, 44, and 45, see col. 47, line 2l—col. 48, line 22 of Herz.
`
`As to claims 11 and 46, see col. 48, lines 5—22 of Herz.
`
`As to claim 47, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims 93;
`
`however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach the selection of a media clip
`
`based on collected data associated with the user of a communication device.
`
`Herz teaches a method of selecting other media to be included in a presentation
`
`comprising collecting data and selecting a media clip based on the selected data (col. 39, line 20—
`
`col. 40, line 10).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant’s
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Herz regarding collecting data associated With a user for
`
`selecting media because using collected data can enhance the relevance of media for a particular
`
`user.
`
`Herz.
`
`As to claim 12, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 47.
`
`As to claims 13 and 48, see col. 38, lines 18—41 and col. 39, line 20—col. 40, line 10 of
`
`As to claims 14 and 49, see col. 47, line 2l—col. 48, line 22 of Herz.
`
`As to claims 16 and 51, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 7 and 42.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`As to claims 118—121 and 125—128, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject
`
`matter of claims 115 and 122 including inserting advertisements into segments (Eyal, col. 13,
`
`lines 1—8) however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach how the advertisements
`
`are chosen.
`
`Herz teaches the manners of selecting advertisements based on audience, profiles,
`
`demographics and rules (col. 29, lines 31—51).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention
`
`to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding selecting commercials with
`
`the teachings of Herz regarding selecting commercials based on audience, profiles,
`
`demographics and rules because doing so allows for particularly relevant commercials.
`
`Claims 15 and 50 are rejected under pre—AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over US. Patent Number 6,389,467 to Eyal in view of US. Patent Application Publication
`
`Number 2002/0007418 by Hedge in further view of US. Patent Number 5,933,811 to Angles et
`
`al.
`
`As to claims 15 and 50, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims
`
`79 and 93 however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach the selection of other
`
`media to be included with a request based on revenue.
`
`Angles teaches a method and system for delivering media to a user comprising using a
`
`viewer profile to generate identification of a plurality of portions of media (col. 4, lines 17—26).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Angles regarding selecting other media base done revenue
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`because Eyal discusses commercials can be inserted into a playlist (see col. 13, lines 1—8) and
`
`Angles shows that revenue can be used to persuade a content provider to insert advertising.
`
`Claims 20, 21, 55, and 56 are rejected under pre—AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over US. Patent Number 6,389,467 to Eyal in view of US. Patent Application
`
`Publication Number 2002/0007418 by Hedge in further view of US. Patent Number 6,654,807
`
`to Farber et al.
`
`As to claims 20 and 55, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims
`
`19 and 93 but the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach selecting a different
`
`resource if a resource is not available.
`
`Farber teaches a method of distributing data comprising selecting a different resource to
`
`facilitate streaming a portion of media if a resource is not able to stream the portion of media and
`
`transmitting an identification of a different resource to a communication device (See Figures 5
`
`and 6).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Farber regarding selecting another resource when a first
`
`resource is unavailable because such a selection allows for a more efficient distribution of data
`
`(see background of Farber).
`
`As to claims 21 and 56, see Figures 5 and 6 of Farber.
`
`Claims 23, 28—35, 58, 63—78, 89—92 and 103—106 are rejected under pre—AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) as being unpatentable over US. Patent Number 6,389,467 to Eyal in view of US. Patent
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Application Publication Number 2002/0007418 by Hedge in further view of US. Patent Number
`
`6,385,596 to Wiser.
`
`As to claims 23 and 58, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims
`
`22 and 57; however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach the generation of
`
`reservations comprising reservation IDs.
`
`Wiser teaches a method comprising generating a reservation associated with streaming a
`
`portion of media to a communication device with the reservation comprising a reservation ID
`
`(see Figure 9).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Wiser regarding reservations because reservations allow for a
`
`media providing to obtain compensation for media provided to a user (see background of Wiser).
`
`As to claims 28—35 and 63—70, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of
`
`claims 79 and 93; however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not teach the claimed authorization
`
`techniques.
`
`Wiser teaches the claimed techniques for authorizing the use of media (see Figure 9 and
`
`corresponding text).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Wiser regarding the authorized use of media because
`
`authorizing the use of media allows for compensation to be provided to a media producer (see
`
`background of Wiser).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`As to claims 71—78, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter of claims 79
`
`and 93 however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach the claimed settlement
`
`methods.
`
`Wiser teaches the claimed settlement methods (see col. 15—col. 20).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Wiser regarding settlement techniques because financial
`
`settlement provides a benefit for content providers to provide media over a network (see
`
`background of Wiser).
`
`As to claims 89—92 and 103—106, the Eyal—Hedge combination teaches the subject matter
`
`of claims 24, 27, 53, and 62 however the Eyal—Hedge combination does not explicitly teach
`
`embedding authentication information and reservation information in each URL.
`
`Wiser teaches a method of providing video via a URL including retrieving authentication
`
`and reservation information (col. 18, lines 9—55).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant's
`
`invention to combine the teachings of the Eyal—Hedge combination regarding providing media to
`
`a requester with the teachings of Wiser regarding including authentication and reservation
`
`information in a URL because such information allows a server to determine whether a request
`
`for information is valid.
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`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 extension fee 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 date of this
`
`final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS BLAIR Whose telephone number is (571)272—3893.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am-5:30pm.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Glen Burgess can be reached on (571) 272—3949. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization Where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/680,452
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 2442
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/DOUGLAS BLAIR/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2442
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

HTTP Error 500: Internal Server Error

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket