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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 3 are amended. Claims 1 and 3-23, as filed 11 February 2026, are examined herein. No new matter is included.
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended claim 1 to include the limitation “a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components”. Applicant argues that the Kim reference teaches a nickel content of 0.5 to 0.99, and is “centered” around 92 mol% nickel. Specifically, Applicant argues that Kim does not provide an example having a composition of 94 mol% Ni or higher. Applicant therefore argues against inherency. Applicant’s arguments are moot in light of a newly cited reference, Nanno.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 includes the limitation “A lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components…” For the purpose of clarity, Examiner notes that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the instant limitation is determined to include “nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) of 6 mol% or less as main components.” Said differently, the titanium is not part of the 94 mol%. Claim 14 allows “d” at a value of 0≤d<1. Therefore, element D is not required to be present.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 5, 10, and 12-16 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.
Claim 1 recites the narrow limitation: ("nickel of 94 mol% or more"). Dependent claim 5 recites a broader range, “wherein the lithium composite metal oxide comprises 82% or more of nickel” (referring to the formula on page 13 of the instant specification, this appears to be 82 mol% and not 82 volume%.) It is not clear how a material having 94 mol% or more of nickel can have between 82 mol% and 94 mol% of nickel, therefore meaning of the instant claim limitation is not clear. The broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “94 mol% or more of nickel”. Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein a and b satisfy 0.82<a<1 and 0<b<0.18”. For similar reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “wherein a and b satisfy 0.94<a<1 and 0<b<0.06”. Claim 12 recites the limitation “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0<a<1, 0<b<1, and 0<c<1, with a proviso of and a, b and c satisfy a>b>c or a>c>b.” For similar reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0<a<0.94, 0<b<0.06, and 0<c<0.06, with a proviso of and a, b and c satisfy a>b>c or a>c>b.” Claim 13 recites the limitation “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0.82<a<1, 0<b<0.18, and 0<c<0.18, with a proviso of and a, b and c satisfy a>b>c or a>c>b.” For similar reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0<a<0.94, 0<b<0.06, and 0<c<0.06, with a proviso of and a, b and c satisfy a>b>c or a>c>b.” Claim 14 includes the limitation “a, b, c, and d satisfy 0<a<1, 0<b<1, and a+b+c+d<1, and a, b, c, and d satisfy a condition a>b>c+d or a>c+d>b.” For similar reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “wherein a, b, c and d satisfy 0<a<0.94, 0<b<0.06, 0<c<0.06, and 0<d<0.06 and a, b, c, and d satisfy a condition a>b>c+d or a>c+d>b.” Claim 15 includes the limitation “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0.82≤a<1, 0≤b<0.18, and O≤c+d<0.18. For similar reasons, the broadest reasonable interpretation is determined to include “wherein a, b and c satisfy 0.94≤a<1, 0≤b<0.06, and 0≤c+d<0.06.”
Claim 16 stands rejected due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5, 10, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 5, 10, and 12-15 contain composition limitations that fail to further limit the composition of claim 1. Claim 16 stands rejected due to dependency. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4-10, 14-15, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nanno (US 20080118829 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4-10, 14-15, 17, and 19, Nanno teaches a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components, ([0134-0137] Example 9: LI0.98Na0.02Ni0.95Ti0.05O2). Regarding charging and discharging characteristics, Nanno discloses (Table 1) that Example 9 has an initial capacity of 189 mAh/g and retains 90.5% capacity after 50 charge/discharge cycles at 4.2 V to 3.0 V. Nanno is silent on the charge/discharge efficiency. However, Nanno does not disclose exactly the claimed charge and discharge conditions: wherein the lithium composite metal oxide simultaneously satisfies at least two characteristics among the following characteristics, measured based on a coin half cell: a characteristic of a charge capacity of 235 mAh/g or more under conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); a characteristic of a charge/discharge efficiency of 90% or less under the conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); and a characteristic of a retention rate of a discharge capacity at a 30th cycle with respect to a discharge capacity at a 1st cycle, of 90% or more under conditions of 1.0C 4.3V (charge) and 1.0C 3.OV (discharge).
Nanno discloses [0134] the use of heat treatment at 700˚C for 12 hours (compare to the instant specification, page 17, Example 1-1, a co-precipitation process followed by calcination at 775 °C.) Nanno teaches co-precipitation for examples 3 and 5 (which have a different chemistry from Example 9) but does not explicitly teach the use of co-precipitation for Example 9.
The composition of Nanno meets the composition limitations of claim 1, and falls within the compositions of Examples 1-1 to 2-2, which meet the claimed charging and discharging limitations. Therefore, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess at least two of the charge/discharge characteristics required by the claim. Regarding claim 4, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess three of the claimed characteristics for the same reasons. This also meets the limitations of claim 5 (94 mol% or more nickel, 0.5 mol% or more titanium – refer to above rejection under 35 USC 112(b)), claim 6 (does not comprise Co and Mn), claim 8 (Li[Li1-mXm]O2, claim 7 (noting that the optional limitation does not require the presence of Co or Mn), the composition of claim 9, and the composition of claim 10. Regarding claims 14 and 15, Examiner notes that for values of c=0 and d=0, Nanno as set forth above fall teaches a composition falling within the claimed composition. Regarding claims 17 and 19, Nanno teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and further teaches [0015] a battery further comprising a negative electrode and an electrolyte.
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) 3, 20, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanno (US 20080118829 A1).
Regarding claims 3, 20, and 21, Nanno teaches a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components, ([0134-0137] Example 9: LI0.98Na0.02Ni0.95Ti0.05O2). Nanno further discloses [0071-0072] the use of silicon compounds including SiOx (silicon oxide) as negative active materials having a large capacity density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to select SiOx as the negative active material for the battery of modified Nanno, based on Nanno’s teaching of that SiOx is one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions to create a battery having large capacity density, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding charging and discharging characteristics, Nanno discloses (Table 1) that Example 9 has an initial capacity of 189 mAh/g and retains 90.5% capacity after 50 charge/discharge cycles at 4.2 V to 3.0 V. Nanno is silent on the charge/discharge efficiency. However, Nanno does not disclose exactly the claimed charge and discharge conditions: wherein the lithium composite metal oxide simultaneously satisfies at least two characteristics among the following characteristics, measured based on a coin half cell: a characteristic of a charge capacity of 235 mAh/g or more under conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); a characteristic of a charge/discharge efficiency of 90% or less under the conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); and a characteristic of a retention rate of a discharge capacity at a 30th cycle with respect to a discharge capacity at a 1st cycle, of 90% or more under conditions of 1.0C 4.3V (charge) and 1.0C 3.OV (discharge).
Nanno discloses [0134] the use of heat treatment at 700˚C for 12 hours (compare to the instant specification, page 17, Example 1-1, a co-precipitation process followed by calcination at 775 °C.) Nanno teaches co-precipitation for examples 3 and 5 (which have a different chemistry from Example 9) but does not explicitly teach the use of co-precipitation for Example 9.
The composition of Nanno meets the composition limitations of claim 1 and falls within the compositions disclosed by the instant specification, Examples 1-1 to 2-2, which meets the claimed charging and discharging limitations. Therefore, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess at least two of the charge/discharge characteristics required by the claim. This also renders obvious the limitations of claims 20 and 21.
Claim(s) 1, 2-10, 14-15, 17, 19-21 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanno (US 20080118829 A1) in view of Kim (US 20030047717 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4-10, and 14-15, Nanno teaches a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components, ([0134-0137] Example 9: LI0.98Na0.02Ni0.95Ti0.05O2). Regarding charging and discharging characteristics, Nanno discloses (Table 1) that Example 9 has an initial capacity of 189 mAh/g and retains 90.5% capacity after 50 charge/discharge cycles at 4.2 V to 3.0 V. Nanno is silent on the charge/discharge efficiency. However, Nanno does not disclose exactly the claimed charge and discharge conditions: wherein the lithium composite metal oxide simultaneously satisfies at least two characteristics among the following characteristics, measured based on a coin half cell: a characteristic of a charge capacity of 235 mAh/g or more under conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); a characteristic of a charge/discharge efficiency of 90% or less under the conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); and a characteristic of a retention rate of a discharge capacity at a 30th cycle with respect to a discharge capacity at a 1st cycle, of 90% or more under conditions of 1.0C 4.3V (charge) and 1.0C 3.OV (discharge).
Nanno discloses [0134] the use of heat treatment at 700˚C for 12 hours (compare to the instant specification, page 17, Example 1-1, a co-precipitation process followed by calcination at 775 °C.) Nanno teaches co-precipitation for examples 3 and 5 (which have a different chemistry from Example 9) but does not explicitly teach the use of co-precipitation for Example 9.
Kim, in the field of (abstract) nickel titanium positive active materials, discloses [0009] a lithium nickel oxide having the formula LiuNivTiwAlxCoyOz, where the u is between about 0.8 and about 1.2, the v is between about 0.5 and about 0.99, the w is between about 0.01 and about 0.5, the X is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, the y is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, and Z is between about 1.8 and 2.3. (Examiner notes that this encompasses the claimed composition). Kim further discloses [0009] that the composition can be made by co-precipitation (one of three methods disclosed) and that the composition provides for a positive active material having a high energy density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to manufacture the composition of Nanno using the co-precipitation method of Kim, because it represents one of a finite number of identified possibilities, with a reasonable expectation of successfully creating a positive active material having a high energy density.
The composition of Nanno in view of Kim meets the composition limitations of claim 1 and has a substantially similar manufacturing process as the material disclosed in the instant specification, Examples 1-1 to 2-2, which meets the claimed charging and discharging limitations. Therefore, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess at least two of the charge/discharge characteristics required by the claim. Regarding claim 4, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess three of the claimed characteristics for the same reasons. This also meets the limitations of claim 5 (94 mol% or more nickel, 0.5 mol% or more titanium – refer to above rejection under 35 USC 112(b)), claim 6 (does not comprise Co and Mn), claim 7 (“further optionally comprises one or more of cobalt (Co) and manganese (Mn), a total content of cobalt and manganese is less than or equal to a content of titanium (Ti).”), claim 8 (Li[Li1-mXm]O2, the composition of claim 9, and the composition of claim 10. Regarding claims 14 and 15, Examiner notes that for values of c=0 and d=0, Nanno as set forth above fall teaches a composition falling within the claimed composition.
Regarding claims 3, 20, and 21, Nanno teaches a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components, ([0134-0137] Example 9: LI0.98Na0.02Ni0.95Ti0.05O2). Nanno further discloses [0071-0072] the use of silicon compounds including SiOx (silicon oxide) as negative active materials having a large capacity density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to select SiOx as the negative active material for the battery of modified Nanno, based on Nanno’s teaching of that SiOx is one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions to create a battery having large capacity density, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding charging and discharging characteristics, Nanno discloses (Table 1) that Example 9 has an initial capacity of 189 mAh/g and retains 90.5% capacity after 50 charge/discharge cycles at 4.2 V to 3.0 V. Nanno is silent on the charge/discharge efficiency. However, Nanno does not disclose exactly the claimed charge and discharge conditions: wherein the lithium composite metal oxide simultaneously satisfies at least two characteristics among the following characteristics, measured based on a coin half cell: a characteristic of a charge capacity of 235 mAh/g or more under conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); a characteristic of a charge/discharge efficiency of 90% or less under the conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); and a characteristic of a retention rate of a discharge capacity at a 30th cycle with respect to a discharge capacity at a 1st cycle, of 90% or more under conditions of 1.0C 4.3V (charge) and 1.0C 3.OV (discharge).
Nanno discloses [0134] the use of heat treatment at 700˚C for 12 hours (compare to the instant specification, page 17, Example 1-1, a co-precipitation process followed by calcination at 775 °C.) Nanno teaches co-precipitation for examples 3 and 5 (which have a different chemistry from Example 9) but does not explicitly teach the use of co-precipitation for Example 9.
Kim, in the field of (abstract) nickel titanium positive active materials, discloses [0009] a lithium nickel oxide having the formula LiuNivTiwAlxCoyOz, where the u is between about 0.8 and about 1.2, the v is between about 0.5 and about 0.99, the w is between about 0.01 and about 0.5, the X is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, the y is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, and Z is between about 1.8 and 2.3. (Examiner notes that this encompasses the claimed composition). Kim further discloses [0009] that the composition can be made by co-precipitation (one of three methods disclosed) and that the composition provides for a positive active material having a high energy density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to manufacture the composition of Nanno using the co-precipitation method of Kim, because it represents one of a finite number of identified possibilities, with a reasonable expectation of successfully creating a positive active material having a high energy density.
The composition of Nanno in view of Kim meets the composition limitations of claim 1 and has a substantially similar manufacturing process as the material disclosed in the instant specification, Examples 1-1 to 2-2, which meets the claimed charging and discharging limitations. Therefore, the composition of Nanno would necessarily possess at least two of the charge/discharge characteristics required by the claim. This also renders obvious the limitations of claims 20 and 21.
Regarding claims 17 and 19, Nanno in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Nanno further teaches [0015] a battery further comprising a negative electrode and an electrolyte.
Claim(s) 11-13, 16, and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanno (US 20080118829 A1) in view of Kim (US 20030047717 A1).
Regarding claims 11 -13, Nanno in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Nanno does not explicitly teach the composition further comprising aluminum (Al) as another main component. Kim, in the field of (abstract) substituted lithium nickel oxide compositions, discloses (FIG. 1D, FIG. 5 showing good capacity retention and at [0009] that the addition of aluminum at 0.03 to 0.05 mol% to lithium nickel oxide compositions improves safety.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to modify Nanno by adding the aluminum of Kim, with a reasonable expectation of improving safety and creating a successful battery with good capacity retention. This also renders obvious the limitation of claims 12 and 13.
Regarding claims 22 and 23, Nanno teaches a lithium composite metal oxide comprising nickel (Ni) of 94 mol% or more and titanium (Ti) as main components, ([0134-0137] Example 9: LI0.98Na0.02Ni0.95Ti0.05O2). Nanno further discloses [0071-0072] the use of silicon compounds including SiOx (silicon oxide) as negative active materials having a large capacity density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to select SiOx as the negative active material for the battery of modified Nanno, based on Nanno’s teaching of that SiOx is one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions to create a battery having large capacity density, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Nanno is silent on the addition of aluminum to the nickel titanium composite oxide.
Kim, in the field of (abstract) substituted lithium nickel oxide compositions, discloses (FIG. 1D, FIG. 5 showing capacity retention and [0009]) that the addition of aluminum to lithium nickel oxide compositions improves safety. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to modify Nanno with the aluminum dopant of Kim, with a reasonable expectation of improving safety and creating a successful battery with good capacity retention.
Regarding charging and discharging characteristics, Nanno discloses (Table 1) that Example 9 has an initial capacity of 189 mAh/g and retains 90.5% capacity after 50 charge/discharge cycles at 4.2 V to 3.0 V. Nanno is silent on the charge/discharge efficiency. However, Nanno does not disclose exactly the claimed charge and discharge conditions: wherein the lithium composite metal oxide simultaneously satisfies at least two characteristics among the following characteristics, measured based on a coin half cell: a characteristic of a charge capacity of 235 mAh/g or more under conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); a characteristic of a charge/discharge efficiency of 90% or less under the conditions of 0.1C 4.3V (charge) and 0.1C 3.OV (discharge); and a characteristic of a retention rate of a discharge capacity at a 30th cycle with respect to a discharge capacity at a 1st cycle, of 90% or more under conditions of 1.0C 4.3V (charge) and 1.0C 3.OV (discharge).
Nanno discloses [0134] the use of heat treatment at 700˚C for 12 hours (compare to the instant specification, page 17, Example 1-1, a co-precipitation process followed by calcination at 775 °C.) Nanno teaches co-precipitation for examples 3 and 5 (which have a different chemistry from Example 9) but does not explicitly teach the use of co-precipitation for Example 9.
Kim, further discloses [0009] a lithium nickel oxide having the formula LiuNivTiwAlxCoyOz, where the u is between about 0.8 and about 1.2, the v is between about 0.5 and about 0.99, the w is between about 0.01 and about 0.5, the X is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, the y is between about 0.00 and about 0.5, and Z is between about 1.8 and 2.3. (Examiner notes that this encompasses the claimed composition). Kim further discloses [0009] that the composition can be made by co-precipitation (one of three methods disclosed) and that the composition provides for a positive active material having a high energy density. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to manufacture the composition of Nanno using the co-precipitation method of Kim, because it represents one of a finite number of identified possibilities, with a reasonable expectation of successfully creating a positive active material having a high energy density.
The composition of Nanno in view of Kim meets the composition limitations of claims 22 and 23 and has a substantially similar manufacturing process as the material disclosed in the instant specification, Examples 1-1 to 2-2, which meets the claimed charging and discharging limitations. Therefore, the composition of Nanno in view of Kim would necessarily possess at least two of the charge/discharge characteristics required by the claim. This also renders obvious the limitations of claim 23.
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanno (US 20080118829 A1) in view of Kim (US 20030047717 A1) as set forth in claims 14 and 17, above, and in further view of Nam (US 20190372110 A1).
Regarding claim 16 and claim 18, Nanno in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. However, Nanno is silent on a concentration gradient and does not explicitly teach wherein at least one of Li, Ni, Ti, Al, and D has a concentration gradient that increases or decreases as a function of a radius of an oxide particle.
Nam, in the field of (abstract) positive active materials, teaches (FIG. 1) a similar lithium composite metal oxide having a gradient of Ni concentration. At ([0025]) Nam contemplates that a core shell gradient is advantageous for stabilizing a structure by maintaining the molar content of nickel in the core portion at a high level to increase capacity and increasing a molar content of a dissimilar metal (e.g. Mn, Co, Al, or the like) while reducing the molar content of nickel in the shell portion.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to modify the active material of Nanno in view of Kim with the gradient of Nam, with a reasonable expectation of successfully creating an active material which supports a higher capacity battery.
This also renders obvious the limitation of claim 18, wherein a coating layer is formed on a surface of a particle of the lithium composite metal oxide.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE A RUTISER whose telephone number is (571)272-1969. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM M-F.
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 on 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.
CLAIRE A. RUTISER
Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/C.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 3/3/2026