UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/404,992
`
`01/12/2017
`
`HIROSHI TAKAHASHI
`
`731156.575
`
`3875
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`GUADALUPE CRUZ” AIXA AMYR
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2466
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/01/2019
`
`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):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Applicant-InitiatedInterview Summary
`
`Examiner
`Aixa A Guadalupe—Cruz
`
`Art Unit
`2466
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`Application No.
`15/404,992
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKAHASHI et al.
`
`All participants (applicant, applicants representative, PTO personnel):
`
`(1) Aixa A. Guadalupe—Cruz.
`
`(2) John Wakeley.
`
`Date of Interview: 26 March 2019.
`
`Type:
`
`[:1 Video Conference
`Telephonic
`C] Personal [copy given to:
`[:1 applicant
`
`[3 applicant's representative]
`
`Exhibit shown or demonstration conducted:
`If Yes, brief description:
`
`Cl Yes
`
`[:1 No.
`
`.103 DOthers
`D112 D102
`IssuesDiscussed D101
`(For each of the checked box(es) above, please describe below the issue and detailed description of the discussion)
`
`Claim(s) discussed: 1.
`
`Identification of prior art discussed: Maltsev and Hong.
`
`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 references etc...)
`
`How the Hong reference is applied to the “a value related to traffic on the 2nd communication processor in the 2nd
`sector adjacent to the 1st sector” limitation in the rejection was discussed. Possible amendments to the claims to
`further define the 1st and 2nd processors, and/or the relation of each processor to a handover unit, were discussed. A
`response will be filed, and the search will be updated, any suggestions will be provided to Mr. Wakeley at that time..
`
`
`
`Applicant recordation instructions: The formal written reply to the last Office action must include the substance of 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 month or
`thirty days from this interview date, or the mailing date of this interview summary form, whichever is later, to file a statement of the substance of the
`interview
`
`Examiner recordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substance of any interview of record. A complete and proper recordation of
`the substance of an interview should include the items listed in MPEP 713.04 for complete and proper recordation including the identification of the
`general thrust of each argument or 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 issues raised.
`
`C] Attachment
`
`/FARUK HAMZA/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTOL-413 (Rev. 8/11/2010)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper NO. 20190327
`
`