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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner notes the following amendments made to the claims:
Claim 1 amended to include parts of limitations of previously presented claims 4 and 5
Claims 4 and 5 amended to correspond to the amendments made to claim 1
Claim 11 amended to include parts of limitations of previously presented claims 14 and 15
Claims 14 and 15 amended to correspond to the amendments made to claim 11
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/02/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4, 11-12, and 14 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, the amendments overcome the previously presented rejection. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jeong (US 20150079451 A1), which teaches the additional limitations of amended claims 1 and 11. Regarding the dependent claims, since no further argument is presented other than their dependency on independent claims 1 and 11, the rejections remain in place and unchanged other than further depending on Jeong. Examiner acknowledges that the specific curved shape and deformability of the fixing member, as described in claims 5 and 15, is what comprises the allowable subject matter, so the amendment only related to the use of fixing member to abut surfaces via the second through hole is not considered to be allowable.
Regarding the allowable subject matter, claims 5-10 and 15-20 are still considered to contain allowable subject matter. Since they were not fully included in the independent claims, the objections remain in place and unchanged. The subject matter is still considered to be allowable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 11-12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190372069 A1) in view of Misu (US 20060103346 A1) and further in view of Jeong (US 20150079451 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches the following elements:
A package housing, comprising: (“The module housing (210) may be made to form an internal space therein and have a first external wall (215), a second external wall (216), a third external wall (217) and a fourth external wall (218) in the front, back, left and right directions.” Lee [0063]. In this case, the module housing functions as the package housing and is held within a battery pack.)
a first end plate: a second end plate disposed opposite to the first end plate: a first side plate: a second side plate disposed opposite to the first side plate, (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
the first side plate and the second side plate are disposed between the first end plate and the second end plate: (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
and a fixing member; (Coupling structure 260 functions as a fixing member which detachably couples the end plates and the side plates.)
PNG
media_image1.png
652
567
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
260
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the first end plate is provided with a first through hole, (“The reinforcing portion 7 has a through hole as a connecting concave portion 7 ⟨/ b⟩ A for inserting and connecting the projecting portion 13 ⟨/ b⟩ B of the lateral pipe 13 protruding from both side surfaces of the end plate 3.” Ishibashi [63]. In this case, the through hole acts as a through hole and the projecting portion 13B acts as the protrusion passing through the through hole.)
and the first side plate is provided with a protrusion passing through the first through hole: : (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. And “Further, in the vertical extension part (243), through holes (247, 248) may be formed at locations corresponding to the coupling protrusion (261, 262) so that the coupling protrusion (Items 261, 262 in FIGS. 2 and 3) of the guide coupling structure (260) is penetrated into the through holes.” Lee [0106]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
and the fixing member detachably fixes the first end plate with the first side plate, (Coupling structure 260 functions as a fixing member which detachably couples the end plates and the side plates. It is detachable because the fixing member is inherently used to attach the plates, and does not use a permanent method such as welding or adhesion, therefore, one skilled in the art would also be able to detach the plates in the event that it is desirable to disassemble the package housing.)
wherein the protrusion comprises a second through hole (“The coupling protrusion (262) may be formed to have a gap (H), which divides the right and left of the upper portion based on a central axis.” Lee [0068] and “The gap (H) may be recessed to have a predetermined depth in the direction from the upper portion of the coupling protrusion (262) to the external walls (215, 216, 217, 218). The recessed depth may extend to the outer surface of the second external wall (216B).” Lee [0069]. Gap H in protrusion 262 can be considered an additional through hole, and is in conjunction with couple portion 260 to connect the external walls to each other. In this case, if the fixing portion of Misu were combined with the coupling portion of Lee, the above limitations would be met. This would work with the fixing portion of Misu as there are through holes on the member in which Misu’s fixing portion is connected to (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the surrounding body 126 has a cylinder hollow portion 126b which is substantially cylinder-hollow shaped and has plural through holes 126g around there,” Misu [0059])
Lee is silent on the following elements of claim 1:
wherein the fixing member comprises a first block and a second block, one end of the first block is connected to one end of the second block, and an angle between the first block and the second block is less than 90 degrees.
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate.
Misu teaches the following elements of claim 1 that are not found in Lee:
wherein the fixing member comprises a first block and a second block, one end of the first block is connected to one end of the second block, and an angle between the first block and the second block is less than 90 degrees. (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the fixing portion 122 has a pair of nail-shaped fixing-portion-side engaging portions 122c, and a pair of linking portions 122b which are curve-wise plate shapes curve-wise extending from the detector body 121 and link the fixing-portion-side engaging potions 122c and the detector body 121.” Misu [0061])
PNG
media_image3.png
446
553
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Misu and Lee are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of housings for a plurality of battery cells including a fixing member for securing different parts of the assembly together. While the fixing member of Misu is directed towards securing a temperature detector to the battery case, this could easily be applied to fixing two sets of plates or walls to each other, and therefore would be an obvious modification to make. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include the fixing member of Misu in order to effectively attach its end plates to its side plates in a manner which is resistant to changes in size by the secondary battery as the elastic nature of the fixing member allows it to deform in the case where the case expands due to increased pressure within the battery module. This would be desirable in a housing for a plurality of battery cells as it would increase durability and decrease the chance of mechanistic failure due to an expulsion of gas and increase in pressure caused by the battery cells.
By using the fixing portion of Misu with the battery housing of Lee, the additional limitations of claim 2 would also be met without requiring any further modification or motivation. This would additionally apply to claim 12 in regards to claim 11, which it depends on.
Lee and Misu are both silent on the following elements of amended claim 1:
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate.
However, Jeong teaches all of the elements of claim 1 that are not found in Lee or Misu:
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate. (See comparison between instant figure 1B and Jeong figure 1. The additional limitation of amended claim 1 is essentially describing the formation of a box, which is taught by the structure of Jeong. The fixing member is used to connect the end plates to the outside of the structure.)
PNG
media_image4.png
656
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
687
619
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Jeong is considered to be analoguos to Lee because they are both within the same field of battery packs with end plates fixed to a case frame. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Lee including a first and second through hole to use a fixing member having multiple blocks to abut the through hole and the end plate of the frame, as this would be a normal function of a fixing member in a battery pack. Jeong states that its design has an improved coupling structure for the assembly of a plurality of battery cells (“One inventive aspect is a battery pack having an improved coupling structure for easily assembling two or more battery cells as a module and substantially guaranteeing sufficient coupling strength.” Jeong [0007]), which would be desirable in a battery pack.
Regarding claim 4, modified Lee teaches all of the additional limitations:
The package housing according to claim 2, wherein (“The coupling protrusion (262) may be formed to have a gap (H), which divides the right and left of the upper portion based on a central axis.” Lee [0068] and “The gap (H) may be recessed to have a predetermined depth in the direction from the upper portion of the coupling protrusion (262) to the external walls (215, 216, 217, 218). The recessed depth may extend to the outer surface of the second external wall (216B).” Lee [0069]. Gap H in protrusion 262 can be considered an additional through hole, and is in conjunction with couple portion 260 to connect the external walls to each other. In this case, if the fixing portion of Misu were combined with the coupling portion of Lee, the above limitations would be met. This would work with the fixing portion of Misu as there are through holes on the member in which Misu’s fixing portion is connected to (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the surrounding body 126 has a cylinder hollow portion 126b which is substantially cylinder-hollow shaped and has plural through holes 126g around there,” Misu [0059])
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches the following elements:
A battery- pack, comprising: (“Referring to FIG. 13, a battery pack (1000) according to the present invention may include at least two battery modules (200). Specifically, at least two or more battery modules (200, 201, 202, 203) may be arranged and aligned in one direction.” Lee [0132])
a plurality of battery cells connected in series or in parallel: (“Further, each module housing may comprise: an upper case including a first receiving part formed in a hollow structure and covering an outer surface of an upper part of the plurality of cylindrical battery cells; and a lower case coupled with the upper case and including a second receiving part formed in a hollow structure covering an outer surface of a lower part of the plurality of cylindrical battery cells.” Lee [0016. In this case, the plurality of cells are coupled via a bus bar “Each bus bar may comprise: a body plate extended in an arrangement direction of the plurality of cylindrical battery cells and a terminal connection parts protruded and extended from a first end of the body plate, each terminal connection part contacting the first or second electrode terminals of a respective one of the plurality of battery cells.” Lee [0023])
and a package housing. (“The module housing (210) may be made to form an internal space therein and have a first external wall (215), a second external wall (216), a third external wall (217) and a fourth external wall (218) in the front, back, left and right directions.” Lee [0063]. In this case, the module housing functions as the package housing and is held within a battery pack.)
wherein the package housing comprises: a first end plate: a second end plate disposed opposite to the first end plate: a first side plate: a second side plate disposed opposite to the first side plate. (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
the first side plate and the second side plate are disposed between the first end plate and the second end plate: (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
and a fixing member; (Coupling structure 260 functions as a fixing member which detachably couples the end plates and the side plates.)
PNG
media_image1.png
652
567
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
260
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the first end plate is provided with a first through hole, and the first side plate is provided with a protrusion passing through the first through hole: (“On at least one of the first external wall (215), the second external wall (216), the third external wall (217) and the fourth external wall (218), a guide coupling structure (260) including a coupling protrusion (261, 262) and a guiding groove (266, 267) may be formed to guide an arrangement location of another battery module (200).” Lee [0064]. And “Further, in the vertical extension part (243), through holes (247, 248) may be formed at locations corresponding to the coupling protrusion (261, 262) so that the coupling protrusion (Items 261, 262 in FIGS. 2 and 3) of the guide coupling structure (260) is penetrated into the through holes.” Lee [0106]. In this case, two of the external walls are end plates and two of the external walls are side plates.)
and the fixing member detachably fixes the first end plate with the first side plate. (Coupling structure 260 functions as a fixing member which detachably couples the end plates and the side plates. It is detachable because the fixing member is inherently used to attach the plates, and does not use a permanent method such as welding or adhesion, therefore, one skilled in the art would also be able to detach the plates in the event that it is desirable to disassemble the package housing.)
wherein the protrusion comprises a second through hole (“The coupling protrusion (262) may be formed to have a gap (H), which divides the right and left of the upper portion based on a central axis.” Lee [0068] and “The gap (H) may be recessed to have a predetermined depth in the direction from the upper portion of the coupling protrusion (262) to the external walls (215, 216, 217, 218). The recessed depth may extend to the outer surface of the second external wall (216B).” Lee [0069]. Gap H in protrusion 262 can be considered an additional through hole, and is in conjunction with couple portion 260 to connect the external walls to each other. In this case, if the fixing portion of Misu were combined with the coupling portion of Lee, the above limitations would be met. This would work with the fixing portion of Misu as there are through holes on the member in which Misu’s fixing portion is connected to (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the surrounding body 126 has a cylinder hollow portion 126b which is substantially cylinder-hollow shaped and has plural through holes 126g around there,” Misu [0059])
Lee is silent on the following elements of claim 11:
Wherein the fixing member comprises a first block and a second block, one end of the first block is connected to one end of the second block, and an angle between the first block and the second block is less than 90 degrees.
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate.
Misu teaches the following elements of claim 11 that are not found in Lee:
Wherein the fixing member comprises a first block and a second block, one end of the first block is connected to one end of the second block, and an angle between the first block and the second block is less than 90 degrees. (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the fixing portion 122 has a pair of nail-shaped fixing-portion-side engaging portions 122c, and a pair of linking portions 122b which are curve-wise plate shapes curve-wise extending from the detector body 121 and link the fixing-portion-side engaging potions 122c and the detector body 121.” Misu [0061])
PNG
media_image3.png
446
553
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Misu and Lee are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of housings for a plurality of battery cells including a fixing member for securing different parts of the assembly together. While the fixing member of Misu is directed towards securing a temperature detector to the battery case, this could easily be applied to fixing two sets of plates or walls to each other, and therefore would be an obvious modification to make. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include the fixing member of Misu in order to effectively attach its end plates to its side plates in a manner which is resistant to changes in size by the secondary battery as the elastic nature of the fixing member allows it to deform in the case where the case expands due to increased pressure within the battery module. This would be desirable in a housing for a plurality of battery cells as it would increase durability and decrease the chance of mechanistic failure due to an expulsion of gas and increase in pressure caused by the battery cells.
By using the fixing portion of Misu, the additional limitations of claim 12 would also be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.
Lee and Misu are both silent on the following elements of amended claim 11:
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate.
However, Jeong teaches all of the elements of claim 11 that are not found in Lee or Misu:
a surface of the first block abuts an inner wall of the second through hole, and a surface of the second block abuts a main plane of the first end plate. (See comparison between instant figure 1B and Jeong figure 1. The additional limitation of amended claim 1 is essentially describing the formation of a box, which is taught by the structure of Jeong. The fixing member is used to connect the end plates to the outside of the structure.)
PNG
media_image4.png
656
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
687
619
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Jeong is considered to be analoguos to Lee because they are both within the same field of battery packs with end plates fixed to a case frame. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Lee including a first and second through hole to use a fixing member having multiple blocks to abut the through hole and the end plate of the frame, as this would be a normal function of a fixing member in a battery pack. Jeong states that its design has an improved coupling structure for the assembly of a plurality of battery cells (“One inventive aspect is a battery pack having an improved coupling structure for easily assembling two or more battery cells as a module and substantially guaranteeing sufficient coupling strength.” Jeong [0007]), which would be desirable in a battery pack.
Regarding claim 12, modified Lee teaches all of the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Lee is silent on the following elements of claim 11:
The battery pack according to claim 11. wherein the fixing member is an elastic member, and the fixing member is deformed in a direction perpendicular to a main plane of the first end plate.
However, Misu teaches all of the limitations of claim 12 not found in Lee:
The battery pack according to claim 11. wherein the fixing member is an elastic member, and the fixing member is deformed in a direction perpendicular to a main plane of the first end plate. (“Furthermore, as to the inventive secondary battery structure, it is preferable that the fixing portion of the temperature detector is elastically deformable, and the detector body elastically contacts and presses a surface of the battery case with aid of elastic memory of the fixing portion which engages with the supporting member in a elastically deformed state.” Misu [0014]. As can be seen in Misu figure 1, the elastic deformation would occur in a direction perpendicular to that of the end plate it is attaching the temperature detector to. Therefore, if this fixing member were applied in place of the coupling portion of Lee, it would meet all of the claimed limitations.)
Regarding claim 14, modified Lee teaches all of the additional limitations:
The battery pack according to claim 12, wherein (“The coupling protrusion (262) may be formed to have a gap (H), which divides the right and left of the upper portion based on a central axis.” Lee [0068] and “The gap (H) may be recessed to have a predetermined depth in the direction from the upper portion of the coupling protrusion (262) to the external walls (215, 216, 217, 218). The recessed depth may extend to the outer surface of the second external wall (216B).” Lee [0069]. Gap H in protrusion 262 can be considered an additional through hole, and is in conjunction with couple portion 260 to connect the external walls to each other. In this case, if the fixing portion of Misu were combined with the coupling portion of Lee, the above limitations would be met. This would work with the fixing portion of Misu as there are through holes on the member in which Misu’s fixing portion is connected to (“As shown in FIG. 4A, the surrounding body 126 has a cylinder hollow portion 126b which is substantially cylinder-hollow shaped and has plural through holes 126g around there,” Misu [0059])
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190372069 A1) in view of Misu (US 20060103346 A1), further in view of Jeong (US 20150079451 A1) and further in view of Fujishima (US 20190229310 A1).
Regarding claim 3, modified Lee teaches all of the elements of claim 2, as shown above. Lee and Misu are silent on the following elements of claim 3:
The package housing according to claim 2, wherein a deformation amount of the fixing member is greater than 0 mm and less than or equal to 8 mm.
However, Fujishima teaches all of the elements of claim 3 that are not found in Lee or Misu. Specifically, Fujishima teaches that the amount of deformation can be adjusted in order to optimally provide protection to the battery case, and is therefore a result effective variable:
The package housing according to claim 2, wherein a deformation amount of the fixing member is greater than 0 mm and less than or equal to 8 mm. (“As illustrated in FIG. 4, however, the restraining load on the stack 20 in the stacking direction can be controlled mainly through elastic deformation of the elastic columnar bodies 54, from the point in time at which the elastic columnar bodies 54 finally abut the base plates 56 when upon further expansion (elongation) of the stack 20 in the stacking direction until the length of stack in the stacking becomes a predetermined first length X1 (mm), typically until the restraining load reaches an upper limit or until the length of the stack 20 in the stacking direction reaches an upper limit-length (for convenience referred to as X2 (mm) in the present embodiment).” Fujishima [0032])
Fujishima is considered to be analogous to Lee and Misu because it is related to a fixing member for a battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elastic fixing member of Misu to deform to a certain amount, specifically between 0 and 8mm, as this would be optimizing a result-effective variable. Fujishima teaches this as a result-effective variable as it depends on the maximum restraining load and the upper limit length of the expansion of the battery stack. It would be obvious to use the specific range of 0mm to 8mm as the deformation amount as it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
The limitations of claim 13 would be met by this same modification without requiring any further motivation.
Regarding claim 13, modified Lee teaches all of the elements of claim 12, as shown above. Lee and Misu are silent on the following elements of claim 13:
The battery pack according to claim 12. wherein a deformation amount of the fixing member is greater than 0mm and less than or equal to 8 mm.
However, Fujishima teaches all of the elements of claim 3 that are not found in Lee or Misu. Specifically, Fujishima teaches that the amount of deformation can be adjusted in order to optimally provide protection to the battery case, and is therefore a result effective variable:
The battery pack according to claim 12. wherein a deformation amount of the fixing member is greater than 0mm and less than or equal to 8 mm. (“As illustrated in FIG. 4, however, the restraining load on the stack 20 in the stacking direction can be controlled mainly through elastic deformation of the elastic columnar bodies 54, from the point in time at which the elastic columnar bodies 54 finally abut the base plates 56 when upon further expansion (elongation) of the stack 20 in the stacking direction until the length of stack in the stacking becomes a predetermined first length X1 (mm), typically until the restraining load reaches an upper limit or until the length of the stack 20 in the stacking direction reaches an upper limit-length (for convenience referred to as X2 (mm) in the present embodiment).” Fujshima [0032])
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5-10, 15-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 5 and 15, While Misu teaches an elastic fixing element with two curved surfaces that connect the two blocks, there is no teaching regarding the abutment of the blocks and the curved sections with the through holes, and there is no obvious reasoning for how to combine the closest pieces of prior art to come to the invention described in the claims. Claims 6-10 and 16-20 are considered to contain allowable subject matter because they are dependent on claims 5 and 15, respectively, which are considered to contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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, NICHOLAS SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752