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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/29/2025 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to papers filed 08/29/2025 in which claims 4-6 and 9 were canceled; claims 10-19 were withdrawn; and claim 1 was amended. All the amendments have been thoroughly reviewed and entered.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, and 20-21 are under examination.
Withdrawn Objections/Rejections
The Examiner has re-weighted all the evidence of record. Any rejection and/or objection not specifically addressed below is hereby withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set of rejections and/or objections presently being applied to the instant application.
Modified Rejections
Necessitated by Applicant’s Claim Amendments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-8 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (US 2008/0234394 A1) in view of Zhou et al (Adv. Funct. Mater., 2013, 23: 1664-1670), Tuteja et al (US 2018/0353433 A1) and Doshi (US 2012/0020106 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hong teaches a Janus particle comprising a core particle such as silica, TiO2 or ZrO2, wherein the core particle has a first region and a second region (Abstract; [0007]-[0009], [0033], [0037]-[0039], [0059], [0060], [0065]-[0066], [0075], [0085], [0089]-[0092]; Examples 1 and 3). Hong teaches the surface of the core particle is chemically modified with a coating of a silane surface modifying agent including (aminopropyl)triethoxysilane and n-octadecanetrichlorosilane ([0038]-[0039], [0089]-[0092]). Hong teaches the Janus particle has a particle diameter of greater than 100 nm to 10 µm ([0037]). Hong teaches the Janus particles are preferred to have contact angle between 30° to 140° (Hong: [0009], [0084], Example 3).
While Hong does not expressly teach that the silane surface modifying agent is a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane, it would have been obvious to incorporate a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong in view of the guidance from Zhou, Tuteja and Doshi.
Zhou teaches silica nanoparticles coated with a fluoroalkylsilane such as 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane, wherein said fluoroalkylsilane coated silica nanoparticles exhibited amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties (Zhou: Abstract; pages 1664, 1668 and 1669).
Tuteja teaches silanized surface treated core particle that is treated with UV radiation so as to provide amphiphilic Janus particle in which the silanized core particle, particularly, a silanized titanium oxide (TiO2) has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), as upon exposure to deep UV irradiation, the surface energy of TiO2 surfaces in the unmasked regions increases significantly due to the photo-catalytic cleavage of the TiO2-silane bond, thus provides a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) (Tuteja: Abstract; [0008], [0012], [0023], [0026], [0042], [0045], [0053]-[0054], [0056], [0058]-[0060], [0062], [0077]-[0085], [0130], [0149]; claims 19-21). Tuteja teaches the silane agent that is used for treating the surface of the core particle include a fluoroalkyl silane ([0083] and [0130]; claim 21). Tuteja teaches formulating the Janus particles into a compact film and the surface of said Janus particles would have a water contact angle of between 30° to 140° (Tuteja: [0056], [0058]-[0059], [0060], [0061], [0089], Table 1).
Doshi teaches silanized surface treated core particle in which the silane agent used for surface treating the core particle include dimethyldichlorosilane, octyltrimethoxysilane, oxtyltriethoxysilane, hexamethyldisilazane, 3-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-methacryloxypropyltriethoxysilane, hexadecyltrimethoxysilane, hexadecyltriethoxysilane, dimethylpolysiloxane, glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, glycidyloxypropyltriethoxysilane, nanofluorohexyltrimethoxysilane, tridecafluorooctyltrimethoxysilane, tridecafluorooctyltriethoxysilane, aminopropyltriethoxysilane, or a mixture thereof (Doshi: Abstract; [0014], [0019]-[0022], [0039], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0069], [0073]-[0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong, and produce the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because as discussed above, Zhou provided the guidance to do so by teaching that a fluoroalkylsilane such as 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane can be used as a silane surface coating agent for core particles such as silica particles, and such fluoroalkylsilane coated silica particles exhibited amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectation of success in incorporating a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong because as discussed above, Tuteja established that silane agent that is used for treating the surface of the core particle include fluoroalkyl silanes, and Doshi established that aside from aminopropyltriethoxysilane disclosed in Hong, alkylsilanes and fluoroalkylsilanes are known suitable silane agents for surface treating or coating the core particle of Hong (Doshi: [0069]). Thus, it would have been merely simple substitution of one known silane surface modifying agent, particularly, a fluoroalkylsilane, for another, to obtain predictable results of a silanized surface treated core particle with amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties, and achieve Applicant’s claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
While Hong does not expressly teach that the second region is either uncoated or is coated by the coating that has been partly or fully degraded, such that the first region displays hydrophobic/oleophilic or amphiphobic properties and the second region displays amphiphilic properties and that the Janus particles are in the form a compact film of claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further treat the silane coated Janus particle of Hong in view of Zhou with UV radiation to create amphiphilic Janus particles in which the silanized core particle of Hong has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), and formulate said Janus particles into a compact film having a water contact angle of from 30° to 140°.
One of ordinary skill in the art would been motivated to do so because Tuteja provided the guidance to do so by teaching that the silanized surface treated core particle of Hong in view of Zhou can be further treated with UV radiation so as to provide amphiphilic Janus particle in which the silanized core particle, particularly, a silanized titanium oxide (TiO2) has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), as upon exposure to deep UV irradiation, the surface energy of TiO2 surfaces in the unmasked regions increases significantly due to the photo-catalytic cleavage of the TiO2-silane bond, thus provides a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) (Tuteja: Abstract; [0008], [0012], [0023], [0026], [0042], [0045], [0053]-[0054], [0056], [0058]-[0060], [0062], [0077]-[0085], [0130], [0149]; claims 19-21). Tuteja further provided guidance to formulate the Janus particles into a compact film and the surface of said Janus particles would have a water contact angle of between 30° to 140° (Tuteja: [0056], [0058]-[0059], [0060], [0061], [0089], Table 1).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectation of success in doing so because Hong indicated that the core particle can be silica, TiO2 or ZrO2 and said core particle can be surface treated with a silane, and can be further modified with electromagnetic radiations such as UV irradiation such that the resultant Janus particle obtained has two regions, with each region having a different functionality or property (Hong: Abstract; [0007]-[0009], [0033], [0037]-[0039], [0059], [0060], [0065]-[0066], [0075], [0085], [0089]-[0092]; Examples 1 and 3). Hong further indicated that the resultant Janus particles are preferred to have contact angle between 30° to 140° (Hong: [0009], [0084], Example 3). Thus an ordinary artisan seeking to produce a film of Janus particles having a first surface region be hydrophobic and a second surface region being amphiphilic, would have looked to further exposed the silanized core particle of Hong in view of Zhou to UV irradiation so as to cleave the TiO2-silane bond, thus providing a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) so as obtain resultant film of Janus particles having contact angle between 30° to 140°, and achieve Applicant’s claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
It would also have been obvious that the surface treatment of the core particle such as TiO2 of Hong in view of Zhou with a silane agent would result in a covalent bond between the TiO2 and the silane, as Doshi establishes that the silane agent when reacted with metal oxide provides a crosslinked particle in which the silanol group crosslinked on the surface of the particle (Doshi: Abstract; [0014], [0019]-[0022], [0039], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0069], [0073]-[0074]).
Regarding claims 2-3, Hong, Zhou, Tuteja, and Doshi teach silica, TiO2 or ZrO2 as a suitable core particle (Hong: [0038]; Zhou: Abstract; pages 1664, 1668 and 1669; Tuteja: [0008], [0053], [0077], [0130], claim 19; Doshi: [0036], [0045], [0048], [0054], and [0062]).
Regarding claims 7-8 and 21, Doshi provide the guidance for optimizing the Janus particle of Hong such that the volume of the first region of the Janus particle to be 50% and the second region of the Janus particle to be 50% ([0019]-[0022]).
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the in art the before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, as evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quadir et al (US 2007/0231355 A1) in view of Hong et al (US 2008/0234394 A1) in view of Zhou et al (Adv. Funct. Mater., 2013, 23: 1664-1670), Tuteja et al (US 2018/0353433 A1), Doshi (US 2012/0020106 A1), and Lahann et al (US 2008/0242774 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Quadir teaches a sunscreen formulation containing Janus particles and a cosmetically acceptable carrier ([0003]-[0016], [0019]-[0026], [0032], [0037]-[0039], [0122]-[0131], [0146]; Example 3, claims 1 and 7-11).
However, Quadir does not expressly teach the particular Janus particle of claim 1.
Regarding the particular Janus particle of claim 1, Hong teaches a Janus particle comprising a core particle such as TiO2 or ZrO2, wherein the core particle has a first region and a second region (Abstract; [0007]-[0009], [0033], [0037]-[0039], [0059], [0060], [0065]-[0066], [0075], [0085], [0089]-[0092]; Examples 1 and 3). Hong teaches the surface of the core particle is chemically modified with a coating of a silane surface modifying agent including (aminopropyl)triethoxysilane and n-octadecanetrichlorosilane ([0038]-[0039], [0089]-[0092]). Hong teaches the Janus particle has a particle diameter of greater than 100 nm to 10 µm ([0037]). Hong teaches the Janus particles are preferred to have contact angle between 30° to 140° (Hong: [0009], [0084], Example 3).
While Hong does not expressly teach that the silane surface modifying agent is a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane, it would have been obvious to incorporate a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong in view of the guidance from Zhou, Tuteja and Doshi.
Zhou teaches silica nanoparticles coated with a fluoroalkylsilane such as 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane, wherein said fluoroalkylsilane coated silica nanoparticles exhibited amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties (Zhou: Abstract; pages 1664, 1668 and 1669).
Tuteja teaches silanized surface treated core particle that is treated with UV radiation so as to provide amphiphilic Janus particle in which the silanized core particle, particularly, a silanized titanium oxide (TiO2) has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), as upon exposure to deep UV irradiation, the surface energy of TiO2 surfaces in the unmasked regions increases significantly due to the photo-catalytic cleavage of the TiO2-silane bond, thus provides a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) (Tuteja: Abstract; [0008], [0012], [0023], [0026], [0042], [0045], [0053]-[0054], [0056], [0058]-[0060], [0062], [0077]-[0085], [0130], [0149]; claims 19-21). Tuteja teaches the silane agent that is used for treating the surface of the core particle include a fluoroalkyl silane ([0083] and [0130]; claim 21). Tuteja teaches formulating the Janus particles into a compact film and the surface of said Janus particles would have a water contact angle of between 30° to 140° (Tuteja: [0056], [0058]-[0059], [0060], [0061], [0089], Table 1).
Doshi teaches silanized surface treated core particle in which the silane agent used for surface treating the core particle include dimethyldichlorosilane, octyltrimethoxysilane, oxtyltriethoxysilane, hexamethyldisilazane, 3-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-methacryloxypropyltriethoxysilane, hexadecyltrimethoxysilane, hexadecyltriethoxysilane, dimethylpolysiloxane, glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, glycidyloxypropyltriethoxysilane, nanofluorohexyltrimethoxysilane, tridecafluorooctyltrimethoxysilane, tridecafluorooctyltriethoxysilane, aminopropyltriethoxysilane, or a mixture thereof (Doshi: Abstract; [0014], [0019]-[0022], [0039], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0069], [0073]-[0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong, and produce the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because as discussed above, Zhou provided the guidance to do so by teaching that a fluoroalkylsilane such as 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane can be used as a silane surface coating agent for core particles such as silica particles, and such fluoroalkylsilane coated silica particles exhibited amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectation of success in incorporating a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as the silane surface modifying agent that is used for coating the surface of the core particle of Hong because as discussed above, Tuteja established that silane agent that is used for treating the surface of the core particle include fluoroalkyl silanes, and Doshi established that aside from aminopropyltriethoxysilane disclosed in Hong, alkylsilanes and fluoroalkylsilanes are known suitable silane agents for surface treating or coating the core particle of Hong (Doshi: [0069]). Thus, it would have been merely simple substitution of one known silane surface modifying agent, particularly, a fluoroalkylsilane, for another to obtain predictable results of a silanized surface treated core particle with amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties, and achieve Applicant’s claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
While Hong does not expressly teach that the second region is either uncoated or is coated by the coating that has been partly or fully degraded, such that the first region displays hydrophobic/oleophilic or amphiphobic properties and the second region displays amphiphilic properties and that the Janus particles are in the form a compact film of claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further treat the silane coated Janus particle of Hong in view of Zhou with UV radiation to create amphiphilic Janus particles in which the silanized core particle of Hong has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), and formulate said Janus particles into a compact film having a water contact angle of from 30° to 140°.
One of ordinary skill in the art would been motivated to do so because Tuteja provided the guidance to do so by teaching that the silanized surface treated core particle of Hong in view of Zhou can be further treated with UV radiation so as to provide amphiphilic Janus particle in which the silanized core particle, particularly, a silanized titanium oxide (TiO2) has a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) and a wettable surface region (hydrophilic/amphiphilic), as upon exposure to deep UV irradiation, the surface energy of TiO2 surfaces in the unmasked regions increases significantly due to the photo-catalytic cleavage of the TiO2-silane bond, thus provides a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) (Tuteja: Abstract; [0008], [0012], [0023], [0026], [0042], [0045], [0053]-[0054], [0056], [0058]-[0060], [0062], [0077]-[0085], [0130], [0149]; claims 19-21). Tuteja further provided guidance to formulate the Janus particles into a compact film and the surface of said Janus particles would have a water contact angle of between 30° to 140° (Tuteja: [0056], [0058]-[0059], [0060], [0061], [0089], Table 1).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectation of success in doing so because Hong indicated that the core particle can be silica, TiO2 or ZrO2 and said core particle can be surface treated with a silane, and can be further modified with electromagnetic radiations such as UV irradiation such that the resultant Janus particle obtained has two regions, with each region having a different functionality or property (Hong: Abstract; [0007]-[0009], [0033], [0037]-[0039], [0059], [0060], [0065]-[0066], [0075], [0085], [0089]-[0092]; Examples 1 and 3). Hong further indicated that the resultant Janus particles are preferred to have contact angle between 30° to 140° (Hong: [0009], [0084], Example 3). Thus an ordinary artisan seeking to produce a film of Janus particles having a first surface region be hydrophobic and a second surface region being amphiphilic, would have looked to further exposed the silanized core particle of Hong in view of Zhou to UV irradiation so as to cleave the TiO2-silane bond, thus providing a non-wettable surface region (hydrophobic) with a wettable surface region (amphiphilic) so as obtain resultant film of Janus particles having contact angle between 30° to 140°, and achieve Applicant’s claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success.
It would have been obvious that the surface treatment of the core particle such as TiO2 of Hong with a silane agent would result in a covalent bond between the TiO2 and the silane, as Doshi establishes that the silane agent when reacted with metal oxide provides a crosslinked particle in which the silanol group crosslinked on the surface of the particle (Doshi: Abstract; [0014], [0019]-[0022], [0039], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0069], [0073]-[0074]).
Accordingly, in view of the combined teachings of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja and Doshi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the Janus particle of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja and Doshi, as the Janus particle in the sunscreen formulation of Quadir, and produce the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Lahann provided the guidance to do so by teaching that the Janus particles having at least two phases that are optically or visually distinct from another such as those of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja, and Doshi are suitable for incorporation in variety of applications including cosmetic applications (Lahann: Abstract; [0005]-[0008] and [0025]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectation of success in incorporating the Janus particle of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja, and Doshi, as the Janus particle in the sunscreen formulation because Quadir indicated that Janus particle having two regions with each region imparting a different property or function, is suitable for use in a cosmetic product such as a sunscreen formulation (Quadir: [0003]-[0016], [0019]-[0026], [0032], [0037]-[0039], [0122]-[0131], [0146]; Example 3, claims 1 and 7-11), and thus, the Janus particle of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja, and Doshi is within the scope of said suitable Janus particle as indicated in Quadir.
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the in art the before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, as
evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that none of the cited prior arts of Hong, Tuteja, and Doshi disclose a 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane coating. Applicant further alleged that paragraphs [0083] and [0130] and claim 21 of Tuteja does not relate to core particle and no realization in these paragraphs of the advantage of using 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecylsilane. (Remarks, pages 7-9).
In response, the Examiner disagrees. As discussed above in the pending 103 rejection, Zhou provided the guidance for incorporating a fluoroalkylsilane such as 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as a silane surface coating agent for core particles of Hong, and where Tuteja established that silane agent that is used for treating the surface of the core particle include fluoroalkyl silanes, and Doshi established that aside from aminopropyltriethoxysilane disclosed in Hong, alkylsilanes and fluoroalkylsilanes are known suitable silane agents for surface treating or coating the core particle of Hong (Doshi: [0069]). Thus, it would have been merely simple substitution of one known silane surface modifying agent, particularly, a fluoroalkylsilane, for another, to obtain predictable results of a silanized surface treated core particle with amphiphobicity and oleophobic properties, and achieve Applicant’s claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success. See 103 rejection, pages 4-9 of this office action. Accordingly, the use of 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorodecyltriethoxysilane as the fluoroalkylsilane surface coating agent for core particles would have been obvious based on the combined teachings of Hong in view of Zhou, Tuteja, and Doshi.
As a result, for at least the reason discussed above, claims 1-3, 7-8, and 20-21 remain obvious and unpatentable over the combined teachings of the cited prior arts in the pending 103 rejections as set forth in this office action.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOAN THI-THUC PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3288. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Brian Kwon can be reached at 571-272-0581. 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.
/DOAN T PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1613