Unrren States PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE.
ae
SMSO ea
‘ora ‘omnor01e OnE 2000 Tor
Twitter, Ine anes
Aun: Legal = patents, RAVER, CHARLES
1355 Market Street, Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94103 Ts oe
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
PIOL-90A (Rev, 08107)UNITED STATEe PATENT AND TRADEMARIC OFFICE,
a Trademark ce
United State?
DO NOT USE IN PALM PRINTER
(THROPARTY REQUESTER'S 00»
PONDENGE ADE
RYAN ALLEY IP |
POBOxa7
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22813
EX PARTE REEXAMINATION COMMUNICATION TRANSMITTAL FORM
REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. 90014,072,
PATENT NO, 9,088,532.
ART UNIT 3992
Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
Office in the above identified ex parte reexamination proceeding (37 CFR 1.550(f))
Where this copy is supplied after the reply by requester, 37 CFR 1.535, or the time for filing a
reply has passed, no submission on behalf of the ex parte reexamination requester will be
acknowledged or considered (37 CFR 1.550(g)).
PTOL-465 (Fiev.07-04)Application/Control Number: 90/014,072 Page 2
Art Unit: 3992
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR EX PARTE REEXAMINATION
|.___Summary
A Substantial New Question of Patentability (SNQ) affecting claims 1-3, 8, 9, 13-
15, 17, 20 and 21 of US Patent 9,088,532 (hereinafter "the ‘532 Patent") is raised by the
Request for reexamination filed 1/19/2018 by the Third Party Requester for the reasons
set forth below.
Reexamination has been requested of claims 1-3, 8, 9, 13-15, 17, 20 and 21 of
the ‘532 Patent. The ‘532 Patent issued 7/21/2015 based on US Patent Application Ser.
No. 13/744,929, filed 1/18/2013. The ‘532 Patent is still enforceable.
ll___Related Proceedings and Matters
The '532 Patent under reexamination is not currently under open litigation.
The ‘532 Patent is not currently subject to Inter Partes Review before the Patent
Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB”),
As the instant ‘632 Patent is still pending, and no final decision has been made in
any litigation, the instant claims in this proceeding will be given their "broadest
reasonable interpretation” consistent with the Patent specification. Please see In re
‘Swanson, No. 07-1534 (Fed. Cir. 2008).