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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 30 June 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 30 June 2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
The reference number “26a” added to paragraph [0028] of the amended specification is drawn to an unsupported amendment to amended Figure 1, specifying the precise locations of two contact pads, wherein the originally filed disclosure did not have support for the precise positioning of the contact pads or their labeling.
The modification of “a subsection” to “lower connecting subsections 36” in paragraph [0035] of the amended specification is drawn to an unsupported amendment to amended Figure 1, specifying the precise locations of two “lower connecting subsections”, and introduces a relative position of a subsection (lower) and a plurality of subsections, wherein the originally filed disclosure did not have support for more than one subsection, its position of being “lower”, or its exact position in a Figure.
The addition of references “26a” to amended drawings introduce new matter regarding the locations of the contact pads within the semiconductor component. The disclosure only provides support for the contact pads to be somewhere on a surface of the power semiconductor components [0028] and that they are in electrical contact with contact sections of the connection device [0029].
The addition of the reference label “52” to the amended drawings circled below introduces new matter regarding the first pressure element section, as this section of the figure has a differing respective pressure than the uncircled originally and also newly labeled sections “52” (respective pressure 66 compared to 62) and also does not have the same width as the uncircled originally and also newly labeled sections “52”, width “302”. It is not clear that said newly labeled section is also a first pressure element section having the same disclosed properties from the disclosure of the original application.
PNG
media_image1.png
283
403
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The addition of “lower connecting subsections 36” to the amended drawings introduces new matter regarding the originally disclosed “subsection” (see [0035]) or “lower section 36” (see original claim 1). There is only explicit disclosure of an embodiment comprising a configuration of a pressure element that is intended to press on a subsection that is directly adjacent to the contact section 32 and extending around a connecting section 34 [0035] and a different embodiment comprising a second pressure element section pressing onto a lower section 36 (original claim 1). There is no disclosure of a plurality of subsections, a plurality of lower sections, the exact placement of the intended subsection for the pressure element of Figures 2a and 6 to press on (the connection device 3 of Figure 1 is not in an embodiment with the pressure element 50 of Figures 2a and 6, as pressure element 50 of Figure 1 has multiple pressure elements), or any details of the lower section (position, what it is a lower section of, etc.) other than its connection to the second pressure element.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 30 June 2025. These drawings are unacceptable for the reasons stated below.
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because they introduce new matter (see above, under “Response to Amendment”) and because they fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.83(a) or 37 CFR 1.84 (see discussion below).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84 because:
The scale of the drawings are too small to adequately show sufficient detail in their current state or when reproduced. The scale to which a drawing is made must be large enough to show the mechanism without crowding when the drawing is reduced in size to two-thirds in reproduction. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(k). See Figure(s) 1-7.
The drawings contain reference numbers that are too small. Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least 0.32 cm (1/8 inch) in height. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(p(3)). See Figure(s) 1-7.
The drawings are improper since they contain copy marks. The drawings must be reasonably free from erasures and must be free from alterations, overwriting, interlineations, folds, and copy marks. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(e). See Figure(s) 1-7.
The drawings contain deficient line quality and reference characters. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. Reference characters (numerals are preferred), sheet numbers, and view numbers must be plain and legible. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(l) and 1.84(p(1)). See Figure(s) 1-7.
The drawings make improper use of shading. The use of shading in views is encouraged if it aids in understanding the invention and if it does not reduce legibility. Shading is used to indicate the surface or shape of spherical, cylindrical, and conical elements of an object. Such shading is preferred in the case of parts shown in perspective, but not for cross sections. Solid black or gray shading areas are not permitted, except when used to represent bar graphs or color. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(m) and 1.84(h(3)). See Figure(s) 1-7.
The view numbering format is improper because non-partial independent views are inexplicably designated alphanumerically instead of being consecutively numbered using Arabic numerals. Only partial views intended to form one complete view, on one or several sheets, must be identified by the same number followed by a capital letter. Different views must otherwise be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals, starting with 1, independent of the numbering of the sheets and, if possible, in the order in which they appear on the drawing sheet(s). Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(u). See Figure(s) 2a-d, 3a-d, and 4a-c.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims and therefore the:
contact pad that is facing away from the substrate in a normal direction N facing away from said substrate (Claim 1)
the two respective contact sections (Claim 1)
first pressure element sections press with respective first pressure surface section onto an assigned contact section (Claim 1)
second pressure element section presses with a second pressure surface section onto one of a lower connecting subsection and the entire connecting section (Claim 1)
second pressure surface section has a curved surface contour matched to the connecting section (Claim 1)
the first material section comprises first depressions, in which the second material section is arranged, in the region proximate the second pressure element section (Claim 11)
the second material section comprises second depressions, in which the first material section is arranged, in the region proximate the first pressure element section (Claim 12)
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Power Semiconductor Module Comprising Pressure Mounted Device Having Pressure Element Sections of Different Shore-A Hardnesses.
The amendment filed 30 June 2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: See discussion above, under “Response to Amendment”.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and depending claims 4, 7, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the amendments including the limitations of “the second pressure element section (54) presses with a second pressure surface section (540) onto one of a lower connecting subsection (36)”, “a first material section (52,56) consisting of a first elastomeric material”, and “a second material section (54,8) consisting of a second elastomeric material”, and “the respective first pressure surface section (520) is configured in a planar fashion; and the second pressure surface section (540) has a curved surface contour matched to the connecting section (34)” were not disclosed in the originally filed application. The limitations appear to mix disclosed embodiments and refer to different reference numbers.
Regarding Claim 1, the limitations of “a first material section consisting of a first elastomeric material” and “a second material section consisting of a second elastomeric material” was not in the originally filed disclosure. The disclosure only supports the material sections consisting of resilient materials ([0012]) and the material sections comprising of elastomers ([0012]).
Regarding Claim 7, the limitation of “the second elastomeric material is formed of the group of plastic foams including a silicone foam” in combination with the previous limitation of “a second material section (54,8) consisting of a second elastomeric material” was not disclosed in the originally filed application. There is only disclosure of the second pressure element comprising an elastomeric material or plastic foams”.
Regarding Claim 11, the limitation of “the first material section comprises first depressions, in which the second material section is arranged, in the region proximate the second pressure element section” in combination with the earlier claimed limitations of “the second pressure surface section has a curved surface contour matched to the connecting section”, “a first material section consisting of a first elastomeric material”, and “a second material section consisting of a second elastomeric material”, was not disclosed in the originally filed application. It appears that the claim is combining different embodiments to create a device that was not explicitly disclosed.
Regarding Claim 12, the limitation of “the second material section comprises second depressions, in which the first material section is arranged, in the region proximate the first pressure element section” in combination with the earlier claimed limitations of “the second pressure surface section has a curved surface contour matched to the connecting section”, “a first material section consisting of a first elastomeric material”, and “a second material section consisting of a second elastomeric material”, was not disclosed in the originally filed application. It appears that the claim is combining different embodiments to create a device that was not explicitly disclosed.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 and therefore depending claims 4, 7, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The Applicant is encouraged to remove all reference numbers from the claim language in order to enhance claim clarity and help meet disclosure requirements.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “each said power semiconductor component includes” (Line 6), “each respective said contact pad” (Line 10), “the respective said power semiconductor component” (Line 11), “a further subsequent said contact pad” (Line 11), “a further said power semiconductor component” (Line 12), “said conductive tracks” (Line 12), “the two respective contact sections” (Line 15), “”each power semiconductor component” (Line 19), “the entire connecting section” (Line 26). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Applicant is encouraged to use consistent claim terminology to refer to particular claim elements.
The term “resilient” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “resilient” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Although the application provides example of hardness values and material options that would satisfy the limitation of “resilient”, there is no disclosure as to what the scope of the limitation requires.
Claim 1 recites “each said power semiconductor component having a connection device with a metal sheet that electrically conductively connects each respective said contact pad of the respective said power semiconductor component…”, which is unclear if the claim requires a plurality of connection devices or a singular connection device.
Claim 1 recites “respective first and a second pressure element sections” (Line 21) which is unclear if the claim requires a first pressure element section and a second pressure element section, a plurality of first pressure element sections and a second pressure element section, or a plurality of first pressure element sections and a plurality of second pressure element sections.
Claim 1 recites “a first material section (52, 56)” and earlier recites “respective first…element sections (52)”, which is unclear if the claim requires further first element sections.
Claim 1 recites “a second material section (54,8)” and earlier recites “a second element sections…(54)” which is unclear if the claim requires a further second element section.
Claim 1 recites “a second material section (54,8)” which is unclear as the reference “8” refers to a different element, a cooling device, in the drawings.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “at least one of the first pressure element sections” in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the group of plastic foams" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the group of plastic foams" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding Claim 7, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 7 recites the broad recitation “a group of elastomers” and “the group of plastic foams”, and the claim also recites “…including a silicone rubber” and “…including a silicone foam” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 11 cites the limitation “the first material section (56)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a first material section (52,56)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
Claim 11 cites the limitation “the second material section (58)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a second material section (54,8)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
Claim 11 cites the limitation “the second pressure element section (54)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a second material section (54,8)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
Claim 12 cites the limitation “the second material section (58)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a second material section (54,8)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
Claim 12 cites the limitation “the first material section (56)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a first material section (52,56)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
Claim 12 cites the limitation “the first pressure element section (52)” which in combination with the earlier recitation of “a first material section (52,56)” is unclear as to if it is the same section, part of the same section, or another element.
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.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lederer et al. (DE-102016123113-B3).
Regarding Claim 1, Lederer et al. Figures 4-10 disclose a power electronic circuit device having a substrate, comprising:
a plurality of conductive tracks (conductive tracks 22);
a plurality of power semiconductor components arranged on at least one of said conductive track of said plurality of conductive tracks (component 7);
each said power semiconductor component includes a contact pad that is facing away from the substrate in a normal direction N facing away from said substrate (pad of device 7, [0057]-[0059]);
each said power semiconductor component having a connection device with a metal sheet that electrically conductively connects each respective said contact pad of the respective said power semiconductor component to one of a further subsequent said contact pad of a further said power semiconductor component or one of said conductive tracks (connection device 3, [0058]-[0059]);
wherein the connection device respectively further comprises:
a contact section for connection to an assigned contact pad and a connecting section which is arranged between the two respective contact sections (contact section 360 and/or 362, connecting section 340);
a pressure device extending to cover each power semiconductor component (pressure device 5); and
the pressure device comprises a two-dimensional resilient pressure element, and said two-dimensionally resilient pressure element is a continuous element extending to cover each power semiconductor component (pressure element 50);
said two-dimensionally resilient pressure element further comprises:
respective first and a second pressure element sections extending with and continuous with said two-dimensionally resilient pressure elements (first pressure element section 52, second pressure element section 52), wherein the first pressure element sections press with a respective first pressure surface section onto an assigned contact section and the second pressure element section presses with a second pressure surface section onto one of a lower connecting subsection and the entire connecting section (first pressure surface section 560, second pressure surface section 562);
the connecting section has an arched profile and has a highest point placed in the normal direction N (connecting section 340);
the connecting device is configured as a sheet stack alternatively having a metal sheet and insulation sheet (sheet stack 30/32/34);
the pressure element further comprises:
a first material section consisting of a first elastomeric material (56/562, [0011]);
a second material section consisting of a second elastomeric material ([0011]);
wherein:
the pressure element is arranged in a depression of a pressure frame (pressure frame 510/5, pressure element 50); and
said pressure frame comprises a stabilization element (stabilization element top of 5);
wherein:
the respective first pressure surface section is configured in a planar fashion (first pressure surface section 560); and
the second pressure surface section has a surface contour matched to the connecting section (second pressure surface section 562).
However they do not explicitly disclose discloser wherein the stabilization element comprises metal. They disclose that the pressure element may comprise a metal stabilization element ([0011]) and that it is advantageous to do so ([0011]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the stabilization element of the pressure frame to be metal in Lederer et al. in order to advantageously stiffen the pressure frame ([0011]) and in order to enhance heat dissipation properties of the device. Furthermore, it has been held that a conclusion of obviousness can be drawn from “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” such as forming a stiffener of a power device frame of metal, in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lederer et al. (DE-102016123113-B3) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brandenburg et al. (U.S. 2013/0087307).
Regarding Claim 4, Lederer et al. further disclose wherein the component is an IGBT ([0040]) and that the first pressure element section is at least 25% of the area and intended to be as close as possible in size with the area of the power semiconductor component ([0017] and [0060]), but they do not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first pressure element sections has a thickness of from 0.5mm to 15mm. In the same field of endeavor, Brandenburg et al. discloses that IGBT power semiconductor components in power electronic circuit devices typically have a thickness of 12mm by 12mm. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form at least one of the first pressure element sections to have a thickness of at least 25% of the thickness of a conventional IGBT power semiconductor component and therefore have a thickness of from 4mm to 12mm in Lederer et al. in view of Brandenburg et al. because it was known in the art to do so. Furthermore, it has been held that a conclusion of obviousness can be drawn from “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” such forming a pressure element section to have a thickness of from 0.5mm to 15mm, in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). Furthermore, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976), see MPEP 2144.05.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lederer et al. (DE-102016123113-B3) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bogen (U.S. 10,157,806) and Amakawa et al. (JP 5897686 B1).
Regarding Claim 7, Lederer et al. further discloses that the first elastomeric material and second elastomeric material is formed from a group of elastomers including a silicone rubber, but they do not explicitly disclose that the first elastomeric material is formed a the group of elastomers with a first Shore-A hardness of between 30 and 90; and the second elastomeric material is formed from one of:
(a) the group of elastomers including silicone rubber, with a second Shore-A hardness, which is 5% or 10% less than the first Shore-A hardness; and
(b) the group of plastic foams including a silicone foam, with a compression force according to ASTM D1056 of between 25 kPa and 250 kPa.
In the same field of endeavor, Bogen discloses wherein a device is formed of a first elastomeric material and a second elastomeric material, wherein the second elastomeric material is formed from one of: (a) the group of elastomers including silicone rubber, with a second Shore-A hardness, which is within 5% of the first Shore-A hardness of 30-90; and (b) the group of plastic foams including a silicone foam, with a compression force according to ASTM D1056 of between 25 kPa and 250 kPa (Bogen, Column 4, Lines 26-38). Amakawa et al. discloses a substrate-holding device comprising a first resilient material and a second resilient material, wherein the first resilient material is formed from the group of elastomers including a silicone rubber, with a first Shore-A hardness of between 30 and 90; and the second resilient material is formed from one of: (a) the group of elastomers including silicone rubber, with a second Shore-A hardness, which within 5% of the first Shore-A hardness; and (b) the group of plastic foams including a silicone foam, with a compression force according to ASTM D1056 of between 25 kPa and 250 kPa (Amakawa et al., [0038]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to form the first resilient material from the group of elastomers including a silicone rubber, with a first Shore-A hardness of between 30 and 90; and the second resilient material from one of: (a) the group of elastomers including silicone rubber, with a second Shore-A hardness, which is within 5% of the first Shore-A hardness; and (b) the group of plastic foams including a silicone foam, with a compression force according to ASTM D1056 of between 25 kPa and 250 kPa in Lederer et al. in view of Bogen and Amakawa et al. in order to firmly hold the power semiconductor device without deforming it (Amakawa et al., [0060]) and to exert a substantially constant pressure during operation and at different temperatures (Bogen Column 4, Lines 30-38).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Abbigale Boyle whose telephone number is 571-270-7919. The Examiner can normally be reached from 11 A.M to 7 P.M., Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Zandra Smith, can be reached at 571-272-2429. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance form a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Abbigale Boyle
Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/ABBIGALE A BOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899