www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`15/810,589
`
`11/13/2017
`
`AYAKO HORIUCHI
`
`731456.452C1
`
`2305
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`DANIEL JR, WILLIE J
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2462
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`11/09/2021
`
`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):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Applicant-InitiatedInterview Summary WILLIE J DANIEL JR
`
`Application No.
`15/810,589
`Examiner
`WILLIE J DANIEL
`JR
`
`Applicant(s)
`HORIUCHI et al.
`AIA (First Inventor
`to File) Status
`Yes
`
`Telephonic
`Blake Kumabe(Reg. No.: 68,240) [AttorneyCECC—C“‘CsCis
`
`
`
`Date of Interview: 01 November 2021
`
`Issues Discussed:
`
`35 U.S.C. 103
`
`During the interview, applicant explained the main differences between the newly proposed amendment
`(including a new limitation(s), new claim(s), and/or current claim language) as supported bythe orig.
`spec. of the instant application and the applied reference(s). Also, applicant provided additional
`language for a proposed amendment of the instant application. The Examinerindicated that the applied
`reference(s) more than adequately meets the current claim language ofthe instant application, provided
`comments regarding the proposed amendment(s), and further indicated the proposed amendment(s)
`includes languagethat differs from the current claim languageof the instant application. Also, the
`Examinerprovided further comments related to the reference(s) for applicant to consider when preparing
`comment(s) and/or amendment(s). Applicant stated that an amendment of the claim language as well as
`a terminal disclaimer maybefiled. Applicant was advisedto file a formal response. The Examiner will
`consider the comment(s) and/or amendmenit(s) of the formal response when filed and respond
`accordingly.
`
`/WILLIE J DANIEL JR/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
`
`37 CFR§ 1.2 Businessto be transacted in writing
`
`Applicant is reminded that a complete written statement as to the substance of the interview must be made of record in
`the application file. It is the applicants responsibility to provide the written statement, unless the interview wasinitiated
`by the Examiner and the Examiner hasindicated that a written summarywill be provided. See MPEP 713.04
`Pleasefurther see:
`MPEP 713.04
`Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 1.133 Interviews, paragraph (b)
`
`Applicant recordation instructions: The formal written reply to the last Office action must include the substanceof the
`interview. (See MPEP section 713.04). If a reply to the last Office action has already been filed, applicant is given a
`non-extendable period of the longer of one monthor thirty days from this interview date, or the mailing date of this
`interview summary form, whichever is later, to file a statement of the substanceofthe interview.
`
`Examiner recordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substanceof any interview of record. A complete
`and proper recordation of the substance of an interview should include the itemslisted 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 outcome of the
`interview, to include an indication as to whether or not agreement was reached on the issuesraised.
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-413/41 3b (Rev. Oct. 2019)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper No. 011---01
`
`