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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 through 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Xu (US 2012/0107590) in view of Hirotsuru (US 2014/0182824) in view of Liu (US 2018/0323130).
Regarding claim 1.
Xu teaches a heat conductor, comprising:
[…] a diamond particle (fig 7:18; [para 0018]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) that are distributed […], wherein an outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0018]) is successively coated with a carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]), a first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0041]), and a second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]); the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0041]); the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]; the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042] covers an entire outer surface of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) in a chemical or physical deposition manner (fig 5:; [para 0042]); wherein a first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) and an outer surface of the second metal film layer are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 7:sintered; [para 0041,0044]), and wherein the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) […] is disposed between the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0041] and the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0041]), a material (Zn, Mg, W; [para 0042]) of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0041])is different than a material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]), and a material (cobalt; [para 0042]) of the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) is same as the material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]); and a plurality of second metal nanoparticles (fig 7:34; [para 0044]) evenly grown (see annotated figure 7) on the outer surface of the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0044]).
PNG
media_image1.png
388
978
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Xu does not teach the carbide layer is in contact with the diamond core.
Hirotsuru teaches providing a carbide film layer disposed directly in contact with the diamond particle and inside a first metal film layer ([para 0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a diamond particle with a carbide coating in contact therewith in order to suppress the formation of metal carbides that have low thermal conductivity and to increase the surface wettability for metals ([para 0005]).
Xu does not teach the particles are in a matrix material
Liu teaches a heat conductor, comprising: a matrix (fig 3; [para 0021]; a [sinterable core-shell] particle (fig 3:122; [para 0026]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) that are distributed in the matrix (fig 3; [para 0025,0026]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a matrix in order to disperse, contain, and distribute the nanoparticles for processing.
Regarding claim 2, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Liu further teaches adjacent first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 4; [para 0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that metallic nanoparticles will metallic bond with each due to the random distribution of particles in the matrix causing various different particle connection.
Regarding claim 4, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Liu teaches a first metal nanoparticle of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles and a second metal nanoparticle of the plurality of second metal nanoparticles that are adjacent to each other are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 3:0028]).
PNG
media_image2.png
318
593
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that metallic nanoparticles will metallic bond with each due to the random distribution of particles in the matrix causing various different particle connections.
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches wherein the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) is one of a tungsten carbide film layer, a titanium carbide film layer, a chromium carbide film layer, a molybdenum carbide film layer, a nickel carbide film layer, or a silicon carbide film layer ([para 0042]).
Regarding claim 6, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches a thickness of the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) is greater than or equal to 10 nanometers and less than or equal to 500 nanometers ([para 0032,0043]).
The total thickness of the shell layers is 25-2500nm, distributed among the multiple shells. Given the teaching of the references, it would have been obvious to determine the optimum thickness of the layers involved. See In re Aller, Lacey and Hall (10 USPQ 233-237) It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575,1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 7, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches a material used by the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) is tungsten, titanium, chromium, molybdenum, nickel, platinum, or palladium.
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches a thickness of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042])is greater than or equal to 10 nanometers and less than or equal to 500 nanometers.
The total thickness of the shell layers is 25-2500nm, distributed among the multiple shells. Given the teaching of the references, it would have been obvious to determine the optimum thickness of the layers involved. See In re Aller, Lacey and Hall (10 USPQ 233-237) It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575,1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 9, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) comprises one or more thin metal film layers, and a material used by each thin metal film layer of the one or more thin metal film layers is copper, silver, gold, platinum, palladium, indium, bismuth, aluminum, or alumina ([para 0042]).
Regarding claim 10, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches thickness of the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) is greater than or equal to 0.1 micrometer and less than or equal to 10 micrometers ([para 0032,0043]).
The total thickness of the shell layers is 25-2500nm, distributed among the multiple shells. Given the teaching of the references, it would have been obvious to determine the optimum thickness of the layers involved. See In re Aller, Lacey and Hall (10 USPQ 233-237) It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575,1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 11, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, Further:
Xu teaches a material of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) is one or more of copper, silver, gold, or stannum ([para 0044]).
Regarding claim 12, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Liu teaches a volume ratio of the matrix in the heat conductor is less than or equal to 10% ([para 0032]).
Regarding claim 13, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches diamond particle (fig 7:18; [para 0042])
Liu teaches wherein a volume ratio of the particle [filler; [para 0032]) in the heat conductor is 0.05% to 80% ([para 0032]).
Note the greater density of the particles (metal) to the density of the matrix (polymer) results in an 85% to 95% volume ratio being 0.05% to 80% weight ratio. The total thickness of the shell layers is 25-2500nm, distributed among the multiple shells. Given the teaching of the references, it would have been obvious to determine the optimum ratio of the constituents involved. See In re Aller, Lacey and Hall (10 USPQ 233-237) It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed ranges or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 f.2d 1575,1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 14, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the heat conductor according to claim 1, further:
Xu teaches wherein a particle size of the diamond particle is greater than or equal to 0.01 micrometer and less than or equal to 200 micrometers (fig 7:18; [para 0023,0032]).
Note: Xu states a particle size of 0.7 micron to 100 micron; [para 0023] and a shell thickness 25nm to 2500nm; [para 0032], resulting in the claimed diamond core size.
Claim(s) 15, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Xu (US 2012/0107590) in view of Hirotsuru (US 2014/0182824) in view of Liu (US 2018/0323130) in view of Raravikar (US 2019/0267306).
Regarding claim 15.
Xu teaches heat-conducting material ([para 0005]), comprising […]; a diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) that are distributed […], wherein an outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) is successively coated with a carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]), a first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]), and a second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]); the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]); the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0024]); the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]); wherein a first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) and an outer surface of the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0044]) are bonded (sintered) to each other by using a metallic bond ([para 0044]), and wherein the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042] is […]disposed between the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) and the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]), a material (Zn, Mg, W; [para 0042]) of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) is different than a material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]), and a material (cobalt; [para 0042]) of the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) is same as the material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]); and a plurality of second metal nanoparticles (fig 7:34; [para 0044]) evenly grown on the outer surface of the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0042,0044]).
Xu does not teach the carbide layer is in contact with the diamond core.
Hirotsuru teaches providing a carbide film layer disposed directly in contact with the diamond particle and inside a first metal film layer ([para 0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a diamond particle with a carbide coating in contact therewith in order to suppress the formation of metal carbides that have low thermal conductivity and to increase the surface wettability for metals ([para 0005]).
Xu does not teach an organic polymer matrix.
Liu teaches a heat conductor, comprising: a polymer (fig 3; [para 0021]; a [sinterable core-shell] particle (fig 3:122; [para 0026]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) that are distributed in the polymer (fig 3; [para 0025,0026]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a polymer matrix in order to disperse, contain, and distribute the nanoparticles for processing.
Xu does not teach an organic polymer.
Raravikar teaches the polymer binder of the thermal interface material is organic (paragraph 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the polymer binder to be organic in order to facilitate cross linking of the matrix and improve mechanical integrity ([para 0036])
Regarding claim 16, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu in view of Raravikar teaches the heat-conducting material according to claim 15, further:
Liu teaches adjacent first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 3,4:146; [para 0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that metallic nanoparticles will metallic bond with each due to the random distribution of particles in the matrix causing various different particle connections.
Regarding claim 18, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu in view of Raravikar teaches the heat-conducting material according to claim 15, further:
Liu teaches a first metal nanoparticle of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles and a second metal nanoparticle of the plurality of second metal nanoparticles that are adjacent to each other are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 3,6; [para 0026]).
PNG
media_image3.png
392
839
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that metallic nanoparticles will metallic bond with each due to the random distribution of particles in the matrix causing various different particle connections.
Claim(s) 19, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Xu (US 2012/0107590) in view of Hirotsuru (US 2014/0182824) in view of Liu (US 2018/0323130).
Regarding claim 19.
Xu teaches […]
a diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) that are distributed […], wherein an outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) is successively coated with a carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]), a first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]), and a second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]); the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the diamond particle (fig 5,7:18; [para 0042]); the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]); the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0042]) covers an entire outer surface of the first metal film layer (fig 5,7:26; [para 0042]) in a chemical or physical deposition manner ([para 0042]); wherein a first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 7:32; [para 0044]) and an outer surface of the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0042]) are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (sinter; [para 0044]), and wherein the carbide film layer (fig 5:24; [para 0042]) is[…] disposed between the diamond particle (fig 5:18; [para 0042]) and the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]), a material (al, zn, mg, w; [para 0042]) of the first metal film layer (fig 5:26; [para 0042]) is different than a material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7,32; [para 0044]), and a material (cobalt; [para 0042]) of the second metal film layer (fig 5:28; [para 0042]) is same as the material (cobalt; [para 0044]) of the first metal nanoparticle (fig 7:32; [para 0044]); and a plurality of second metal nanoparticles (fig 7:34; [para 0044]) evenly grown on the outer surface of the second metal film layer (fig 5,7:28; [para 0042]) […].
Xu does not teach the carbide layer is in contact with the diamond particle.
Hirotsuru teaches providing a carbide film layer disposed directly in contact with the diamond particle and inside a first metal film layer ([para 0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a diamond particle with a carbide coating in contact therewith in order to suppress the formation of metal carbides that have low thermal conductivity and to increase the surface wettability for metals ([para 0005]).
Xu does not teach the matrix or package structure using.
Liu teaches a package structure (fig 7:200; [para 0043]) of a semiconductor device (fig 7:214; [para 0043]), comprising a semiconductor device (fig 7:214; [para 0043]), a heat dissipation substrate (fig 7:215; [para 0045]), and a heat conductor (fig 7:213; [para 0045]) comprising a matrix ([para 0030]); a particle (fig 3:122; [para 0026]) and a plurality of first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) that are distributed in the matrix (fig 3; [para 0027])
wherein the heat conductor (fig 7:213; [para 0045]) is located between the semiconductor device (fig 7:214; [para 0043]) and the heat dissipation substrate (fig 7:215; [para 0045]); and a first surface of the heat conductor (fig 7:213; [para 0045]) faces a back of the semiconductor device (fig 7:214; [para 0045]) and is in contact with the back of the semiconductor device (fig 7:214; [para 0045]), and a second surface of the heat conductor (fig 7:213; [para 0045]) faces a fastening surface of the heat dissipation substrate (fig 7:215; [para 0045]) and is in contact with the fastening surface of the heat dissipation substrate (fig 7:215; [para 0045]).
PNG
media_image4.png
486
805
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a matrix to contain and disperse the particle, and to provide a semiconductor package in order for the particles to be employed for improving the thermal dissipation of the die during operation.
Regarding claim 21, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the package structure according to claim 19, further:
Liu teaches adjacent first metal nanoparticles (fig 3:124; [para 0026]) are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 3; [para 0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary kill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that sintering would result in metal bonds between the first metal nanoparticles because the dispersion of particles in the matrix will result in adjacent first metal nanoparticles and the sintering process will cause them to bond.
Regarding claim 22, Xu in view of Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the package structure according to claim 19, further:
Liu teaches a first metal nanoparticle of the plurality of first metal nanoparticles and a second metal nanoparticle of the plurality of second metal nanoparticles that are adjacent to each other are bonded to each other by using a metallic bond (fig 3:0028]).
PNG
media_image2.png
318
593
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that metallic nanoparticles will metallic bond with each due to the random distribution of particles in the matrix causing various different particle connections.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Xu (US 2012/0107590) in view of Hirotsuru (US 2014/0182824) in view of Liu (US 2018/0323130) as applied to claim 19 and further in view of Narenda (US 2005/0139999).
Regarding claim 20.
Xu in view Hirotsuru in view of Liu teaches the package structure according to claim 19.
Xu in view of Hiortsuru in view of Liu does not teach a metal back layer on the semiconductor device.
Narenda teaches a back metal layer (fig 2:22; [para 0013]) is disposed on the back of the semiconductor device (fig 2:20; [para 0013]), the back metal layer (fig 2:22; [para 0013]) is one or more thin metal film layers, and a material used by each thin metal film layer of the one or more thin metal film layers is titanium, platinum, palladium, aluminum, nickel, copper, silver, or gold (fig 1,2; [para 0010,0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a metal back layer to the semiconductor device in order to apply a bias to the back of the device ([para 0001]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the even distribution of second metal nanoparticles.
The applicant will note that Xu (US 2012/0107590), as applied above, teaches this limitation is figure 7.
PNG
media_image1.png
388
978
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Specifically, the applicant will see that the second metal nanoparticle 34 is even distributed on the surface of particle 14 (illustrated above using the bisecting plane of reflection to emphasize the even distribution).
The applicant argues that the nanoparticles (34) taught by Xu are not grown on the surface of particle (14).
However, the nanoparticles taught by Xu are on and adhered to the surface of 14 at an atomic (metallic) level. The applicant does not provide reasoning as to why this would not be considered grown or how a grown particle would be distinct. Further, it is unclear what the applicant means by grown if not the precipitation of nanoparticles on the surface of the coated diamond particle, because a polymer matrix is not conducive to the formation of nanoparticles the specification would not be enabling for such an interpretation.
The applicant argues the prior art does not teach the second metal film layer comprises a material different from that of the first metal film layer but the same as the metal nanoparticle.
However, Xu explicitly teaches a finite list of identified predictable materials for each of these components and a person of ordinary skill would be motivated to pursue the known options for predictable solutions. KSR, 550 U.S. at 402-03, 82 USPQ2d at 1390. Further, the applicant is not claiming a specific combination of materials among thousands of possible combinations but rather a much larger category of the second metal film layer comprises a material different from that of the first metal film layer but the same as the metal nanoparticle. This category overlaps a large number of the possible combination of materials taught by Xu.
The applicant argues that Hirotsuru is silent regarding the location of the carbide layer with respect to metal layers.
Hirotsuru is relied upon to teach that it would have been obvious to place the carbide layer in contact with the diamond particle, the omission of an element and its function is obvious. MPEP 2144.04.II.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8451. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00 - 19:00.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571)272-5055. 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.J.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817 February 13, 2026