DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/07/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 18 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Passaniti et al. (US-5389469-A) in view of Zhou et al. (US-20130071744-A1) and in view Huang et al. (US-20080241682-A1) and as evidenced by Takeuchi (US-5807645-A).
Regarding Claims 1-3 and 6, Passaniti discloses an alkaline secondary battery (electrochemical cell; Col. 4, lines 26-43)), comprising:
a positive electrode (cathode body; Col. 4, lines 26-31) that is provided with a positive electrode mixture layer (cathode material; Col. 3, lines 45-49);
a negative electrode (anode; Col. 4, line 39); and
an alkaline electrolyte (Col. 4, lines 37-39; Col. 5, lines 66-67),
wherein the positive electrode mixture layer contains particles of a silver oxide (Ag2O; Col. 3, lines 51-61; Col. 5, lines 5-6, 12-13, 57-62).
Passaniti discloses that the positive electrode mixture can contain a variety of other additive materials (Col. 7, lines 32-35; Col. 8, lines 48-54) such as a cathode additive selected from the group consisting of graphite, Ag2O, MnO2, NiOOH, CaO, MgO, HgO, CdO, CdS, carbon, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and metallic silver (Col. 4, lines 15-21; Col. 8, lines 48-54). The additives CaO and MgO correspond to the recited limitation of insulating inorganic particles, as evidenced by instant Claim 6. The additives graphite and/or carbon correspond to the recited limitation of carbon particles. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) reads on a binder (Col. 9, lines 19-21).
Therefore, although Passaniti does not disclose in a single embodiment wherein the positive electrode mixture layer contains insulating inorganic particles (i.e. CaO and MgO), carbon particles (i.e. graphite and carbon), and a binder (i.e. PTFE), such a combination would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since Passaniti discloses each as a suitable additive to a cathode material (MPEP 2144.06, I), and since Passaniti contemplates that “a variety of ‘additive’ materials can be added to the reacted cathode material” (Col. 8, lines 48-49). Therefore, Passaniti renders obvious a positive electrode mixture which contains insulating inorganic particles, carbon particles, and a binder as required by Claim 1, and wherein the insulating inorganic particles comprise an oxide of Mg or Ca as required by Claim 6.
Passaniti discloses that the cathode additive can be added to the dried cathode mixture (Col. 4 line 67 – Col. 5 line 2), thereby rendering obvious insulating inorganic particles which are present outside the silver oxide particles.
Passaniti discloses that the invention is applied to a silver oxide / zinc button cell (Col. 5, lines 22-23). Passaniti does not disclose the average particle size of the insulating inorganic particles.
Zhou teaches a similar cathode material comprising a silver oxide ([0089, 0112-0123]; Example 1) which can be applied to an alkaline battery [0070, 0072-0073] and which includes a zinc anode [0089, 0122, 0210]. Zhou teaches that the cathode material can comprise a stabilizing agent [0015, 0108]. The stabilizing agents taught by Zhou overlap in scope with the additive taught by Passaniti (i.e. both teach MnO2 and/or MgO). Zhou further teaches that the particles of the stabilizing agent have a mean particle diameter of 250 nm or less [0111]. Zhou teaches that stabilizing agents with a diameter less than 250 nm are able to associate with the silver particles [0114-0115].
Both Passaniti and Zhou are directed towards silver-zinc alkaline batteries which include an additive of inorganic oxide particles. Therefore, in seeking to provide the insulating inorganic particles of Passaniti such that they can associate with the silver particles, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the insulating inorganic particles of Passaniti to have a diameter of 250 nm or less, which is within the claimed range of 0.5 µm or less, with a reasonable expectation that such a size of insulating inorganic particles would result in a successful cathode material for use in an alkaline silver-zinc battery.
As discussed above, Passaniti renders obvious the use of both graphite and carbon in the cathode material. Passaniti does not explicitly teach that the carbon particles are carbon black particles.
Huang teaches a button-type cell which includes a silver oxide positive electrode material, a zinc-containing negative electrode material, and an alkaline electrolyte [0012, 0015, 0029, 0032, 0035, 0048-0049]. Huang teaches that silver-containing oxide materials are relatively poor conductors, and that conductive materials such as one or more of graphite, carbon black, and acetylene black can be added to the positive electrode material [0034].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the carbon additives of modified Passaniti to be graphite particles and carbon black particles with a reasonable expectation that such a selection of carbon additives would result in a successful cathode material capable of increasing the conductivity of the silver oxide cathode material (MPEP 2144.06, I).
Furthermore, since Passaniti renders obvious the use of graphite and “carbon”, and since Huang teaches graphite and carbon black as suitable conductive additives in a silver oxide cathode material, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation that selecting the “carbon” of modified Passaniti to be carbon black would result in a successful cathode material, since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie case of obviousness (MPEP 2144.07).
As laid out above, Passaniti discloses that the positive electrode mixture layer contains Ag2O as the silver oxide (Col. 3, lines 51-61; Col. 5, lines 57-62; Col. 6, lines 11-13).
Although Passaniti does not specifically teach that “a content of Ag2O in the positive electrode mixture layer is 60 mass% or more”, Passaniti does disclose that the content of Ag2O is about 24% to about 75% (Col. 3, lines 55-58; Col. 6, lines 11-13). This range overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected any portion of the range disclosed in the prior art, including the overlapping portion of the range, with a reasonable expectation that selecting the content of Ag2O to be 60 mass% to 75 mass% would result in a successful positive electrode mixture layer for use in an alkaline battery (MPEP 2144.01, I).
Passaniti discloses that the cathode additives are typically added at levels between 2 – 12% by weight (Col. 4, lines 20-21). Passaniti further discloses an embodiment wherein 2% by weight of binder (i.e. PTFE) is added to improve the ability of the cathode mixture to form pellets (Col. 9, lines 14-15, 19-21). Passaniti does not explicitly teach a single embodiment wherein a content of the insulating inorganic particles in the positive electrode mixture layer is “0.1 to 7 mass%” as required by Claim 1 or “0.1 to 5 mass%” as required by Claim 2, wherein a content of the graphite particles in the positive electrode mixture layer is “2 to 7 mass%” as required by Claim 1 or “2 to 4 mass%” as required by Claim 3, wherein a content of carbon black particles in the positive electrode mixture layer is “0.5 mass% or more” as required by Claim 1 or wherein a content of binder in the positive electrode mixture layer is “0.1 to 20 mass%” as required by Claim 1.
In the related prior art, additives of insulating inorganic particles are known to be present in an amount that provides additional stability to the cathode active material as taught by Zhou [Zhou: 0115]. Additionally, carbon black and graphite are added to increase conductivity of a silver oxide cathode material, preferably at an amount of 2 to 6 wt% as taught by Huang [Huang: 0034]. Furthermore, the binder improves the moldability of the cathode material, as disclosed by Passaniti (Col. 9, lines 19-21).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize each of the cathode additives in order to sum to Passaniti’s disclosed 2-12% by weight, including selecting the content of the insulating inorganic particles in the positive electrode mixture layer to be within the range of “0.1 to 5 mass%” (which falls within the range recited in Claim 1 and corresponds to the range recited in Claim 2), selecting the content of the graphite particles in the positive electrode mixture layer to be within the claimed range of “2 to 4 mass%” (which falls within the range recited in Claim 1 and corresponds to the range recited in Claim 3), selecting the content of carbon black particles in the positive electrode mixture layer to be within the claimed range of “0.5 mass% or more”, and selecting the content of binder in the positive electrode mixture layer to be within the claimed range of “0.1 to 20 mass%”, with a reasonable expectation that providing such a content of insulating inorganic particles, graphite particles, carbon black particles, and binder would result in a successful balance between stability, conductivity, and moldability (MPEP 2144.05, II).
Selection of such contents of materials within the claimed ranges is reasonable as evidenced by Zhou, Takeuchi, and Passaniti. Specifically, Zhou evidences a reasonable expectation of success in adding 0.11 wt% of stabilizing agent (corresponds to insulating inorganic particles) to a silver oxide cathode material (see Table 2: Example 4; [0115, 0169, 0193]), Takeuchi evidences a reasonable expectation of success in adding 1% carbon black and 2% graphite to a silver vanadium oxide cathode material (Example 1, Group I: Col. 6, line 62 – Col. 7, line 2), and Passaniti evidences a reasonable expectation of success in adding 2 wt% of binder to the cathode material (Col. 9, lines 14-15).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Passaniti discloses that the silver oxide can comprise “about 24 to about 75 percent Ag2O” (Col. 3: lines 51-58). The recitation of “about” in Passaniti is interpreted as allowing for ranges slightly above and slightly below the disclosed ranges. Therefore, although Passaniti does not explicitly teach that the content of Ag2O in the positive electrode mixture layer is 80 mass% or more, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the content of Ag2O to be 80% with a reasonable expectation that such a content of Ag2O would result in a positive electrode mixture layer (MPEP 2144.05, I). Based on the current evidence of record, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected a positive electrode mixture layer comprising 80 mass% or Ag2O to exhibit the same properties as a positive electrode mixture layer comprising “about 75%” Ag2O.
Additionally, Passaniti discloses that AgO is reduced to Ag2O during initial discharge (Col. 1, lines 28-31). Therefore, it is understood that the content of Ag2O can increase as AgO is reduced during discharge. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation that the content of Ag2O would fall within the claimed range of 80 mass% or more during the course of discharging the alkaline battery.
Regarding Claims 19 and 21, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Passaniti discloses that AgO is reacted with bismuth to form a compound comprising silver, bismuth, and oxygen (Col. 3, lines 60-66, Col. 4, lines 3-15, lines 34-35). The compound can be present on the Ag2O cathode material (see Fig. 1). Therefore, the Ag2O is interpreted as containing Bi, as required by Claim 19. A compound comprising silver, bismuth, and oxygen is further interpreted as reading on an oxide of Bi, Therefore, the Bi is present as an oxide, as required by Claim 21.
Regarding Claim 20, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Although modified Passaniti does not teach that a content of the Bi in the Ag2O material is 0.3 mass% or more and 13 mass% or less, Passaniti does disclose that the addition of bismuth helps to prevent cell expansion due to cathode decomposition or gassing (Col. 9, lines 64-66) and that the cathode material can comprise about 6 to 18% AgBiO3 (Col. 3, lines 55-57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected a content of AgBiO3 such that the content of Bi in Ag2O is within the claimed range of 0.3 mass% to 13 mass% with a reasonable expectation that such a content of Bi would result in a successful positive electrode mixture layer capable of preventing cell expansion (MPEP 2144.05, I).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Passaniti discloses that AgO suffers performance deficiency (Col, 10, lines 29-31). For instance, AgO can decompose when it comes into contact with an electrolyte, thereby increasing pressure inside a sealed cell and reducing capacity (Col. 1, lines 23-26). Passaniti also discloses that the cathode material “preferably” includes AgO (Col. 3, lines 66-68).
Therefore, although modified Passaniti does not teach an embodiment wherein the positive electrode mixture layer “does not contain AgO”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the cathode material such that it does not comprise AgO with a reasonable expectation that a positive electrode mixture layer that does not contain AgO would result in a successful alkaline secondary battery (MPEP 2123, II).
Furthermore, Passaniti discloses that AgO is reduced to Ag2O during initial discharge (Col. 1, lines 28-31). Therefore, when the battery is initially discharged, it is understood to be in a state wherein all AgO has been reduced to Ag2O. Therefore, the positive electrode mixture layer “does not contain AgO”, and the limitation of Claim 21 is met.
Claim(s) 7 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Passaniti et al. (US-5389469-A) in view of Zhou et al. (US-20130071744-A1) and in view Huang et al. (US-20080241682-A1) and as evidenced by Takeuchi (US-5807645-A) as applied to Claim 1, above, and in further view of Takagi et al. (JP-2000036318-A; see English translation provided 10/03/2023 for citations), Kenichi et al. (CN-1832235-A; see English translation provided 01/03/2025 for citations), and Meckfessel Jones et al. (US-20130244101-A1).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Passaniti renders obvious the product of Claim 1. Passaniti discloses that the negative electrode of the silver oxide-zinc battery is a zinc anode (Col. 1, lines 16-17; Col. 4, line 39; Col. 5, lines 19-23; Col. 9, lines 28-30). Although modified Passaniti does not explicitly teach that the zinc anode contains zinc-based particles, such a configuration would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since Huang teaches that the zinc materials of an alkaline cell negative electrode can be zinc powder which can be a zinc metal or a zinc alloy [0049]. A zinc powder is understood be a collection of zinc particles (i.e. zinc metal particles or zinc alloy particles), absent a special definition in the instant specification. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in selecting the zinc anode of modified Passaniti to be a zinc anode containing zinc-based particles selected from zinc particles and zinc alloy particles (MPEP 2144.07).
Passaniti discloses that the electrolyte can be sodium hydroxide, “or other alkaline electrolyte” (Col. 5, lines 66-67) and discloses an embodiment wherein a “conventional alkaline electrolyte” (Col. 9, lines 28-29) is used. Modified Passaniti does not teach that the alkaline electrolyte contains potassium or sodium hydroxide and lithium hydroxide.
Takagi teaches an alkaline battery which can suppress self-discharge and/or corrosion of a negative electrode active material (Abstract). Takagi teaches that the negative electrode mixture includes zinc [0001]. Takagi teaches that the cause of deterioration of the capacity of the alkaline battery containing zinc in the negative electrode active material is the self-discharge and corrosion of the zinc powder (Pg. 3, first paragraph). Takagi teaches an alkaline electrolyte solution comprising potassium hydroxide and lithium hydroxide in a molar ratio range of 10:1 to 1:10 (Abstract; Pg. 3, Embodiment 1). The combined weight of potassium hydroxide and lithium hydroxide in the alkaline electrolyte is 25% to 55% [0006].
Advantageously, Takagi teaches that by using a binary mixed alkaline electrolyte containing lithium hydroxide, the self-discharge and corrosion of the zinc powder can be suppressed (Pg. 3, second paragraph). In addition, lithium hydroxide can improve conductivity and improve discharge characteristics (Pg. 3, Par. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the “conventional alkaline electrolyte” of modified Passaniti to be a mixture of potassium hydroxide and lithium hydroxide as taught by Takagi with a reasonable expectation that selecting the alkaline electrolyte to be a mixture of KOH and LiOH would result in a successful alkaline electrolyte solution capable of suppressing the deterioration of the capacity of the alkaline battery.
Passaniti discloses that a “conventional semipermeable membrane” is used in the alkaline battery (Col. 9, lines 31-32). Modified Passaniti does not teach the addition of polyalkylene glycol to the alkaline electrolyte.
Kenichi teaches a silver oxide battery which uses silver oxide as the cathode material [0002-0003]. Kenichi teaches that the anode contains zinc particles or zinc alloy particles [0027, 0040]. Kenichi further teaches that a separator containing a cellophane film is preferred since the cellophane film has a low resistance and can be expected to improve the heavy load characteristics of the battery [0046].
Therefore, in seeking to improve heavy load characteristics of a silver oxide-zinc battery, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to have selected the separator (i.e. the semipermeable membrane) of modified Passaniti to contain a cellophane film as taught by Kenichi.
Meckfessel Jones teaches an electrolyte which can be applied to a zinc-based battery such as a zinc silver battery [0011]. The electrolyte comprises alkyl-capped polyethylene glycol (PEG), an alkaline agent, and water [0013, 0080].
Advantageously, Meckfessel Jones teaches that by using an electrolyte comprising PEG, an alkaline agent, and water, the electrolyte is improved and is capable of plasticizing and/or maintaining plasticity of a cellophane separator [0032-0033].
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to have included PEG as taught by Meckfessel Jones in the alkaline electrolyte solution of modified Passaniti with a reasonable expectation that such a combination would result in a successful alkaline electrolyte capable of maintaining the plasticity of a cellophane separator in an alkaline secondary battery.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Although modified Passaniti does not explicitly teach that the alkaline electrolyte contains the lithium hydroxide in an amount of 0.1 to 5% by mass, Takagi teaches that the total mass of potassium hydroxide and lithium hydroxide is preferably 25% to 55% and that the molar ratio of potassium hydroxide to lithium hydroxide is within a range of 10:1 to 1:10 (Abstract). Takagi further teaches that lithium hydroxide aids in suppression of the self-discharge and corrosion of the zinc powder (Takagi: Pg. 3, second paragraph) and in improving conductivity and discharge characteristics (Takagi: Pg. 3, Par. 3).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to have optimized the amount of lithium hydroxide in the alkaline electrolyte, including selecting the content of lithium hydroxide to be 0.1 to 5% by mass, such that the advantageous effects of the addition of lithium hydroxide are secured, while preventing excessive lithium hydroxide such that the electrical conductivity of the alkaline electrolyte decreases (MPEP 2144.05, II).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Although modified Passaniti does not explicitly teach that polyalkylene glycol is present in the alkaline electrolyte in an amount of 0.1 to 8% by mass, such a content would have been obvious since Meckfessel Jones teaches that PEG is included in the electrolyte in a range of 5 wt% or less [0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included 5 wt% or less of PEG in the electrolyte solution of modified Passaniti with a reasonable expectation that such a concentration of PEG would result in a successful electrolyte solution. This range overlaps the range recited in the instant application. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected any portion of the ranges recited in the prior art, including those which overlap with the instant application (MPEP 2144.05, I) with a reasonable expectation that such a content of PEG would result in a successful alkaline electrolyte.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Passaniti et al. (US-5389469-A) in view of Zhou et al. (US-20130071744-A1) and in view Huang et al. (US-20080241682-A1) and as evidenced by Takeuchi (US-5807645-A) as applied to Claim 1, above, and in further view of Eylem et al. (US-20080008937-A1).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Passaniti renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above, including that graphite particles are added into the cathode mixture (see rejection of Claim 1, above). Passaniti also discloses that the silver oxide material is reacted with bismuth to form a bismuth/AgO mixture (Col. 6, Equations 1-3; Col. 9, Table 3), including both AgBiO3 and AgBiO2 (Col. 6, lines 59-63). Passaniti does not teach the average particle size of the graphite particles.
Eylem teaches an alkaline battery including bismuth [0004-0006]. The cathode can include silver oxide in addition to bismuth (e.g. AgBiO3: [0060]) and the anode can contain zinc [0016, 0019]. The cathode can further be selected to contain carbon black and/or graphite to enhance bulk electrical conductivity [0058, 0074]. Eylem teaches that the oxidation of graphite can decrease bulk cathode conductivity and form carbon dioxide which can react with the alkaline electrolyte, thereby decreasing the ion conductivity of the electrolyte and degrading cell performance [0074]. In order to circumvent these issues, oxidation-resistant graphite particles, with a particle size from about 2 to 50 µm, can be used [0074-0075]. A larger graphite particle size typically has a lower surface area and is therefore more resistant to oxidation, however, the graphite particles must also be sufficiently small so as to form a conductive network inside the cathode [0075].
Both modified Passaniti and Eylem are directed towards alkaline batteries including a cathode material which includes silver, bismuth and graphite. Therefore, in seeking to prevent oxidation of the graphite particles of Passaniti while allowing the graphite to form a conductive network to enhance bulk cathode conductivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the size of the graphite particles, including a size of 2 to 7 µm, which is within the claimed range of 1 to 7 µm, with a reasonable expectation that such a graphite particle size would result in a successful positive electrode mixture layer (MPEP 2144.05, II).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant has argued (Pgs. 13-14 of 16) that the battery of Okamoto has a nonaqueous electrolyte, and therefore completely differs from that of Passaniti. The Examiner notes that Okamoto is no longer relied upon, and therefore arguments directed towards the combination of Passaniti and Okamoto are moot.
The Applicant has argued (Pg. 14 of 16) that Kenichi clarifies that the reaction between Ag2O and carbon material results in the degradation of the battery. The Examiner has carefully considered this argument, but does not find it persuasive. The Examiner notes that Kenichi teaches the reaction between Ag2O and a carbon material as a possible deleterious reaction which can occur when the silver oxide material is in the form of a fine powder (see Kenichi: [0031-0037]). Kenichi further elaborates that such a reaction can be prevented by making the silver oxide into particles, and Kenichi includes a carbon material in the silver oxide material to increase conductivity (see Kenichi: [0035, 0037]). Furthermore, as established by newly cited Huang, it is known in the art that silver-containing oxides are relatively poor conductors, and that conductive carbon materials such as graphite and carbon black can be added to increase conductivity (see Huang: [0034]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW C NEWMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9873. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1292. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/D.C.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 3/2/2026