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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-12, 16, 18, and 20-25 are currently pending;
Claims 1, 11-12, 16, and 18 are amended;
Claims 2-3, 8, 13-15, 17, and 19 are canceled.
Status of Rejections and Objections Pending Since the Office Action of 12/23/2025
The 103 rejections of claims 1, 4-12, 14, 16-18, and 20-25 are withdrawn based on Applicant’s amendment and argument and replaced with new 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 4-5, 7, 9-11, and 22-25 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jung in view of Son and Jung in view of Son and Adair.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 6 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jung in view of Son and House.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 12, 16, 18, and 20-21 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jung in view of Son and House.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-12, 16, 18, and 20-25 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 includes the limitations “during charge of the electrochemical cell, lithium metal is not plated on the front side of the negative electrode current collector” in lines 20-22 and “lithium metal is…plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector” in lines 29-32. It is unclear to the examiner how the lithium metal is both deposited onto the wall surfaces as described (which would inherently include the front side of the negative electrode current collector) and simultaneously not be plated onto the front side. Claims 4-5, 6-7,9-11, and 22-25 are rejected based on their dependency on claim 1.
In a similar manner, claim 25 also includes the limitation “lithium metal is deposited within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector and plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the top end and the bottom end of the negative electrode current collector” in lines 6-8. It is unclear to the examiner how the lithium metal can be plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the top end and the bottom end of the negative electrode current collector, which would inherently include the front side, when claim 1 already limits that lithium metal is not plated on the front side of the current collector.
Claim 12 include the limitations “the lithium metal is plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector” in lines 38-40 and “lithium metal is not plated on the front side of the negative electrode current collector” in lines 40-41. It is unclear to the examiner how the lithium metal is both deposited onto the wall surfaces as described (which would inherently include the front side of the negative electrode current collector) and simultaneously not be plated onto the front side. Claims 16, 18, and 20-21 are rejected based on their dependency on claim 12.
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, 4-5, 7, 9, 11, and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US-20210336274-A1), hereinafter Jung, in view of Son et al. (US-20150295246-A1), hereinafter Son.
Regarding claim 1, Jung teaches an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions, the electrochemical cell comprising: a positive electrode ([0010] positive electrode); a negative electrode current collector spaced apart from the positive electrode ([0028]; fig. 1 the negative electrode current collector 21 is spaced apart from the positive electrode mixture 13), the negative electrode current collector being of unitary one-piece construction ([0042 negative current collector is three-dimensional with pores) and having a front side that faces toward the positive electrode an opposite back side that faces away from the positive electrode (fig. 1; [0028]), a three-dimensional macroporous structure that defines an interconnected network of open pores construction ([0042 negative current collector is three-dimensional with pores), a thickness defined between the front side and the back side thereof, and a width defined between a first end and an opposite second end thereof in a direction perpendicular to the thickness, wherein the thickness and the width of the negative electrode current collector are substantially perpendicular to one another (fig. 1; [0042] current collector is three-dimensional with a thickness and therefore sides), and wherein the interconnected network of open pores is defined by walls having wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector (fig. 1; [0042] current collector is three-dimensional with a thickness and therefore sides; [0042] negative electrode current collector is three dimensional with pores); a lithium metal negative electrode that comprises, by weight, greater than 97% lithium (Jung [0031] lithium metal is formed purely with lithium formed on the negative current collector to form a negative electrode; since the lithium metal is purely lithium, it would be expected that the wt.% is greater than 97%), wherein the lithium metal negative electrode is formed within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector by the electrochemical deposition of lithium metal within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector during charge of the electrochemical cell, wherein the lithium metal is deposited substantially entirely within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector (Jung [0010]; [0026]; form lithium metal on a negative electrode current collector that is porous; lithium metal can be formed not as a layer but in particle form), and wherein, during charge of the electrochemical cell, the lithium metal is not plated on the front side of the negative electrode current collector ([0042]; [0104] the protective film using the electrolyte suppresses or prevents the lithium dendrite generation on the surface of the current collector, by consequence blocking the lithium from plating on the front side of the current collector to an extent, instead the lithium mostly forming in the pores [0042]) and an ionically conductive electrolyte disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode current collector ([0115] solid electrolytes may be used; fig. 1; [0028]), the ionically conductive electrolyte comprising solid electrolyte material particles and a gel polymer electrolyte ([0036] gel polymer electrolyte), the solid electrolyte material particles and the gel polymer electrolyte being in direct physical contact with the front side of the negative electrode current collector ([0104] the protective film includes the lithium ion conducting polymer and inorganic solid electrolyte and is in direct contact with the negative electrode current collector), and wherein, during charging of the electrochemical cell, lithium metal is deposited within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector (Jung [0010]; [0026]) and plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector([0042]).
Jung fails to teach wherein the open pores have pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers.
Son is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of lithium secondary batteries ([0001]). Son teaches that the current collector is macroporous having pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers ([0014] 5 to 500 micrometers). 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung and further defined the pore size of the current collector such that the current collector is macroporous having pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers. Doing so helps prevent the growth of lithium dendrites (Son [0048]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung also teaches wherein the thickness of the negative electrode current collector is greater than or equal to about 1 micrometer to less than or equal to about 4 millimeters (Jung [0042] negative electrode current collector thickness of 20 to 200 micrometers). 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 5, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung also teaches wherein the walls of the negative electrode current collector are made of an electrochemically inactive electrically conductive material, wherein the electrochemically inactive electrically conductive material comprises a nickel-based material, an iron-based material, a titanium-based material, a copper-based material, a tin-based material, or a combination thereof ([0040] nickel can be used).
Regarding claim 7, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung also teaches wherein the negative electrode current collector has a porosity of greater than or equal to about 0.5 to less than or equal to about 0.99 ([0043] porosity of 50% to 90%). 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 9, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung also teaches wherein the interconnected network of open pores is defined by a three-dimensional stochastic support structure ([0041] the current collector can be a foam, which inherently would have a stochastic support structure).
Regarding claim 11, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 5. Jung also teaches wherein the gel polymer electrolyte infiltrates pores defined between the solid electrolyte materials particles and wets an exterior surface of each of the solid electrolyte material particles, and wherein the solid electrolyte material particles comprise a metal oxide-based material, a sulfide-based material, a nitride-based material, a hydride-based material, a halide-based material, a borate-based material, or a combination thereof ([0115] solid electrolytes may be used; [0036] gel polymer electrolyte; [0125]-[0126]; a solid electrolyte such as halides, nitrides, sulfides, etc.).
Regarding claim 22, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung also teaches that wherein the open pores have pore diameters of greater than or equal to 2 micrometers and less than or equal to 1000 micrometers (Son [0014] 5 to 500 micrometers). 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 23, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung fails to teach wherein each of the open pores has a cross-sectional area of greater than or equal to 0.1 square micrometers and less than or equal to 1000 square micrometers.
Son is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of lithium secondary batteries ([0001]). Son teaches that the open pores have pore diameters of 50 to 500 micrometers. It would have been obvious to optimize the pore size, and consequently cross sectional area, of the open pores such the growth of lithium dendrites is prevented and the occurrence of a short circuit can be inhibited (Son [0048]).
Regarding claim 24, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung also teaches a positive electrode comprising an electrochemically active material ([0028]; [0045]; positive electrode mixture) and having a capacity defined by a volume and a volumetric specific capacity of the electrochemically active material (the positive electrode would inherently have these properties), wherein the negative electrode current collector has a void volume defined by the interconnected network of open pores ([0041] the negative electrode current collector can be a foam which would have the network of open pores which would inherently have a void volume). Jung also teaches that the void volume of the negative electrode current collector is substantially equal to the capacity of the positive electrode divided by the volumetric capacity of lithium metal ([0052] irreversible capacity of a generally used positive electrode active material; Table 2; Examples 1, 3, and 4; the only differences between examples 1, 3, and 4 is the porosity, and by extension void volume, of the negative electrode current collector. As seen in Table 2, the number of cycles at 80% with respect to the initial capacity differs between the 3 examples. Consequently, there must be a relationship corresponding the void volume of the negative electrode current collector and the capacity of the positive electrode that is optimizable by adjusting the irreversible capacity of the positive electrode). It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the relationship between the void volume of the negative electrode current collector and the capacity of the positive electrode and optimized the capacity of the positive electrode to prevent declining capacity and lifetime properties of the battery (Jung [0049]). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 25, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung also teaches that the negative electrode current collector has a height defined between a top end and an opposite bottom end thereof in a direction perpendicular to the thickness and the width, the wall surfaces of the walls extend between the top end and the bottom end and of the negative electrode current collector, and wherein, during charging of the electrochemical cell, lithium metal is deposited within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector (Jung [0010]; [0026])) and plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the top end and the bottom end of the negative electrode current collector (Jung [0042]).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Son, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of House et al. (US-20210091383-A1), hereinafter House
Regarding claim 6, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 5. Modified Jung fails to teach wherein the wall surfaces of the walls of the negative electrode current collector are coated with a layer of an electrochemically inactive carbon-based material.
House is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of current collectors for batteries ([0011]). House teaches a layer of an electrochemically inactive graphene coated on the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector ([0011]-[0012];[0115]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Jung and provide an electrochemically inactive graphene coating on the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector. Doing so provides a protective layer against corrosion while remaining non-reactive and thermally and electrically conductive (House [0012]; [0115]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Son, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Adair et al. (US 20190207205 A1), hereinafter Adair.
Regarding claim 10, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Jung teaches that the negative electrode current collector can come in many forms ([0041]. Jung fails to explicitly teach wherein the interconnected network of open pores is defined by a three-dimensional periodic lattice support structure including a plurality of repeating unit cells, wherein each of the open pores has a cross-sectional shape defined perpendicular to the front side of the negative electrode current collector, and wherein the cross-sectional shape of each of the open pores is polygonal.
Adair is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of porous negative electrode current collectors ([0007]). Adair teaches that the negative electrode current collector can come in many forms, including a foam and porous metal mesh ([0007]), including wherein the interconnected network of open pores is defined by a three-dimensional periodic lattice support structure including a plurality of repeating unit cells ([0007] the negative electrode current collector can be a porous metal mesh, which would be expected to have a lattice structure of repeating cell units), wherein each of the open pores has a cross-sectional shape defined perpendicular to the front side of the negative electrode current collector, and wherein the cross-sectional shape of each of the open pores is polygonal (figs. 5-6 show polygonal pores in the current collector 120, 220).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the form of the negative electrode current collector of Jung such that it has a three-dimensional periodic lattice support structure such as in Adair’s porous metal mesh, as the form is an art recognized equivalent to the foam of Jung. There is a reasonable expectation of success that the porous metal mesh of Adair would perform the same function as a negative electrode current collector that allows lithium metal to fill the pores (Adair [0049]).
Claims 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US-20210336274-A1), hereinafter Jung, in view of Son et al. (US-20150295246-A1), hereinafter Son and House et al. (US-20210091383-A1), hereinafter House
Regarding claim 12, Jung teaches an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions, the electrochemical cell comprising: a positive electrode having a major facing surface ([0010] positive electrode); a negative electrode current collector spaced apart from the positive electrode ([0028]; fig. 1 the negative electrode current collector 21 is spaced apart from the positive electrode mixture 13), the negative electrode current collector having a thickness defined between a front side and an opposite back side thereof and a width defined between a first end and an opposite second end thereof, the thickness and the width of the negative electrode current collector being substantially perpendicular to one another (fig. 1; [0042] current collector is three-dimensional with a thickness); the negative electrode current collector is of unitary one-piece construction and has a three-dimensional porous structure with a void volume defined by an interconnected network of open pores ([0042 negative current collector is three-dimensional with pores), wherein the interconnected network of open pores is defined by walls having wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector;
a lithium metal negative electrode that comprises, by weight, greater than 97% lithium (Jung [0031] lithium metal is formed purely with lithium formed on the negative current collector to form a negative electrode; since the lithium metal is purely lithium, it would be expected that the wt.% is greater than 97%) the lithium metal negative electrode being formed within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector by the electrochemical deposition of lithium metal within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector during charge of the electrochemical cell, wherein the lithium metal is deposited substantially entirely within the open pores of the negative electrode current collector (Jung[0010]; [0026]; form lithium metal on a negative electrode current collector that is porous; lithium metal can be formed not as a layer but in particle form); and an electrically insulating and ionically conductive solid electrolyte ([0115] solid electrolytes may be used) sandwiched between the major facing surface of the positive electrode and the front side of the negative electrode current collector (fig. 1; [0028]), the ionically conductive electrolyte comprising solid electrolyte material particles and a gel polymer electrolyte ([0036] gel polymer electrolyte), the gel polymer electrolyte infiltrating pores defined between the solid electrolyte materials particles and wetting an exterior surface of each of the solid electrolyte material particles, the solid electrolyte material particles and the gel polymer electrolyte being in direct physical contact with the front side of the negative electrode current collector ([0104] the protective film includes the lithium ion conducting polymer and inorganic solid electrolyte and is in direct contact with the negative electrode current collector), wherein, during charging of the electrochemical cell, lithium metal is plated onto the wall surfaces that extend between the front side and the back side and between the first end and the second end of the negative electrode current collector ([0042]) and lithium metal is not plated on the front side of the negative electrode current collector ([0042]; [0104] the protective film using the electrolyte suppresses or prevents the lithium dendrite generation on the surface of the current collector, by consequence blocking the lithium from plating on the front side of the current collector to an extent, instead the lithium mostly forming in the pores ([0042]), and wherein the electrochemical cell has an internal dimension defined between the major facing surface of the positive electrode and the front side of the negative electrode current collector (Jung fig. 1), and wherein during cycling of the electrochemical cell, the internal dimension of the electrochemical cell remains substantially constant (Jung [0032] the problem of lithium metal being removed from the negative current collector through discharge does not occur; given a solid electrolyte and separator, changes in dimension would not be expected).
Jung fails to teach that the current collector is microporous having pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers.
Son is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of lithium secondary batteries ([0001]). Son teaches that the current collector is macroporous having pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers ([0014]). 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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung and further defined the pore size of the current collector such that the current collector is macroporous having pore diameters of greater than 50 nanometers. Doing so helps prevent the growth of lithium dendrites (Son [0048]).
Modified Jung also fails to teach a layer of an electrochemically inactive graphene coated on the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector.
House is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of current collectors for batteries ([0011]). House teaches a layer of an electrochemically inactive graphene coated on the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector ([0011]-[0012];[0115]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Jung and provide an electrochemically inactive graphene coating on the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector. Doing so provides a protective layer against corrosion while remaining non-reactive and thermally and electrically conductive (House [0012]; [0115]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 12. Jung also teaches that the walls of the negative electrode current collector are made of an electrochemically inactive electrically conductive material, wherein the electrochemically inactive electrically conductive material comprises a nickel-based material ([0040] nickel can be used).
Regarding claim 18, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 16. Jung also teaches that the wall surfaces of the negative electrode current collector are not defined by a plurality of discrete particles ([0041] the negative electrode current collector can be a foam, therefore not discrete particles), the negative electrode current collector is free of an electrochemically active lithium intercalation host material, and wherein the negative electrode current collector is free of an electrochemically active conversion material that can electrochemically alloy with lithium or form compound phases with lithium ([0040] the negative electrode current collector is formed of material that does not induce chemical changes; [0032] the problem of lithium metal being removed from the negative current collector by going back to an ionization state through discharge does not occur).
Regarding claim 20, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 18. Jung also teaches that the positive electrode comprises an electrochemically active material and has a capacity defined by a volume and a volumetric specific capacity of the electrochemically active material, and wherein the void volume of the negative electrode current collector is substantially equal to the capacity of the positive electrode divided by the volumetric capacity of lithium metal ([0052] irreversible capacity of a generally used positive electrode active material; Table 2; Examples 1, 3, and 4; the only differences between examples 1, 3, and 4 is the porosity, and by extension void volume, of the negative electrode current collector. As seen in Table 2, the number of cycles at 80% with respect to the initial capacity differs between the 3 examples. Consequently, there must be a relationship corresponding the void volume of the negative electrode current collector and the capacity of the positive electrode that is optimizable by adjusting the irreversible capacity of the positive electrode). It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized the capacity of the positive electrode to prevent declining capacity and lifetime properties of the battery (Jung [0049]). "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 21, modified Jung teaches all of the limitations of claim 20. Jung also teaches that the thickness of the negative electrode current collector is greater than or equal to about 1 micrometer and less than or equal to about 4 millimeters ([0042] the negative electrode current collector may have a thickness in the range of 20-200 micrometers), and wherein the negative electrode current collector has a porosity of greater than or equal to about 0.5 to less than or equal to about 0.99 ([0043] the porosity of 50% to 90%). "[A] prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/M.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722