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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 6/23/26. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not found persuasive. Claims 1, 4-6 and 9-19 are pending with claims 14-19 being withdrawn from consideration.
This Action is Non-FINAL.
Specification
A substitute specification was filed on 6/23/26. However, the specification remains objected to as it remains replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
The specification is objected to as it appears to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and is replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
A substitute specification in proper idiomatic English and in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52(a) and (b) is required. The substitute specification filed must be accompanied by a statement that it contains no new matter.
See, for example, at least [0031]-[0036]. See also, for example, at least [0048] that recites “the solid content of the thickener…based on the total weight of the primer composition” and “such as slipping of the primer layer”. Examiner notes the claims recite “a total solid weight of the primer composition”. See also, for example, [0050]-[0053], [0054] and [0079]-[0081].
The following are only specific examples. The entire specification requires correction. See “to improve a problem of the electrode extraction” at [0032]. See “the high fluidity of the primer layer is added to a surface tension of the slurry, which may cause a problem of a side ring” at [0033]. Surface tension is a property, not a structural element of the slurry.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I in the reply filed on 4/30/25 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 14-19 are withdrawn.
Claims Analysis
Claim 1 recites “for forming a primer layer on a surface of a current collector”, which is an intended use limitation that has not been given patentable weight.
Claim 1 recites “the undissolved residue of the thickener having a particle size capable of passing through a 120 mesh filter”. The specification discloses a 120 mesh filter has a size of 125 mm. Furthermore, it appears the undissolved residue is contained in an intermediate product before being removed from the primer composition. Examiner notes the claim recites “capable of”.
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, 4-6 and 9-13 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 primer composition comprising an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.0005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total weight of solids of the primer composition”, which is indefinite as it is unclear what encompasses the primer composition. The present specification discloses:
[0039] More specifically, the content of the thickener undissolved residue may be calculated according to Equation 1 below.
[0040] [Equation 1]
[0041] Content of thickener undissolved Residue (wt%)= (A- B)/C x 100
[0042] In the Equation 1,
[0043] A: A Sum of a content of the unfiltered thickener undissolved residue and a weight of a mesh filter after filtering the primer composition using a 80 to 120 mesh filter and drying it at a room temperature,
[0044] B: A weight of the mesh filter before filtering,
[0045] C: a weight of the primer composition filtered using the mesh filter x a solid content (wt%) of the primer composition.
[0046] As described above, the primer composition according to the present invention can reduce the pin-hole defects on the electrode surface by removing or lowering the content of the thickener contained in the primer composition, using the mesh filter or the like.
Then the present specification further discloses:
[0018] A method for manufacturing the anode according to the present invention comprises the steps of (a) preparing a slurry containing a thickener including at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of a hydroxyl group and a carboxyl group, (b) filtering the slurry to prepare a primer composition, and (c) applying the primer composition on a current
collector to form a primer layer, wherein a thickener undissolved residue is 0.05 wt% or less, based on the total solid weight of the primer composition prepared in step (b).
[0019] According to an embodiment, step (a) may further include mixing a styrene-butadiene rubber as a binder with the slurry.
[0020] According to an embodiment, step (b) may include filtering the slurry using a mesh filter of 80 to 120.
[0079] According to an embodiment, step (b) may be configured to filter the slurry using a mesh filter of 80 to 120. In the step of preparing the primer composition by filtering the slurry, the mesh filter, for example, the mesh filter of 120 (a mesh size of 125 um), is used to remove the thickener undissolved residue larger particle sizes contained in the primer composition or lower the content thereof, thereby being capable of reducing pin-hole defects occurring on the electrode surface.
Thus, it is unclear what “undissolved residue of thickener”, if any, the primer composition of claim 1 contains. In addition, “a total weight of solids of the primer composition” is indefinite as claim 1 does not particularly point out or distinctly recite what encompasses “a total weight of solids”. Thus, it is unclear what the undissolved residue of the thickener is “based on”. At least Example 1 of the present specification teaches “the thickener undissolved reside was removed to prepare a primer composition” [0088] [0094-00100]. Examiner notes the present specification teaches “step (b)” and “Equation 1” use the same mesh filter of 80 to 120.
To the extent the claims are understood in view of the 35 USC 112 rejections above, note the following prior art rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 9-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al., US 2017/0226365 A1.
Kobayashi teaches a coating liquid (primer composition) capable of forming a coating film that is excellent in adhesiveness to the surface of a base material such as a metal, glass, or a resin even though the coating film contains PVDF which exhibits a remarkable non-tackiness. The coating liquid contains a polar solvent such as N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) or N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone, a hydrophilic polymer such as a chitosan derivative or a cellulose derivative, and polyvinylidene fluoride (abstract; [0048]). The cellulose derivative is at least one selected from the group consisting of hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, methyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose, and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose [0021]. The cellulose derivative is preferably carboxymethyl cellulose [0057]. The coating liquid further containing at least one electrically conductive material selected from the group consisting of acetylene black, Ketjen black, graphite, furnace black, single layer carbon nanofibers, multilayer carbon nanofibers, single layer carbon nanotubes, multilayer carbon nanotubes, and graphene [0023]. The coating liquid may be used to produce and electrode plate for an electrical storage apparatus [0031-0040]. The hydrophilic polymer (cellulose derivative) is dissolved in the polar solvent [0100].
When properties such as physical strength, durability, wear resistance, and adhesiveness to base materials need to be imparted to a coating film, it is preferable to add a binder resin (additional resin component) other than the hydrophilic polymer to the coating liquid. Specific examples of the additional resin component include conventionally known resins such as polyvinyl acetals, fluorine-containing polymers (excluding PVDF), styrene-based polymers, polyamides, polyimides, and polyamide-imides. These resin components obtained from the market may be used as they are, and it is also preferable to use the derivatives thereof taking the solubility to solvents or the dispersibility to dispersion media into consideration [0092]. See at least [0053] of Kobayashi regarding the limitation of claim 4. See at least [0055] of Kobayashi regarding the limitation of claim 5. See at least [0137] of Kobayashi regarding the limitation of claim 6.
Kobayashi further teaches the hydrophilic polymer (thickener) may be hydroxybutyl chitosan stirred and dispersed in a medium such as water-containing isopropyl alcohol. It is preferable that the degree of hydroxyalkylation of the hydroxyalkyl chitosan be 0.5 to 4. It is preferable that the weight average molecular weight of the hydroxyalkyl chitosan be 2,000 to 350,000, and more preferably 5,000 to 250,000. It is preferable that the content of the chitosan derivative in the coating liquid be 0.1 to 40 parts by mass when the total amount of the coating liquid is assumed to be 100 parts by mass, and more preferably 0.5 to 20 parts by mass [0052-0056]. Kobayashi teaches the particle diameter of the active material is 1-100 m.
Kobayashi does not explicitly teach “an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total solid weight of the primer composition”, as recited by at least claim 1. However, Kobayashi teaches the hydrophilic polymer (cellulose derivative; hydroxybutyl chitosan) is dissolved in the polar solvent [0100]. Thus, one of skill in the art would have found the hydrophilic polymer having an undissolved residue of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% (miniscule amount) obvious in view of the teaching by Kobayashi that the hydrophilic polymer is dissolved in the polar solvent.
*
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6 and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al., US 2018/0358622 A1.
Yoo teaches an anode slurry for a secondary battery and an anode comprising the same, in which the dispersibility of an anode active material is improved by increasing the adsorption amount of CMC with respect to the anode active material by adjusting the degree of substitution or physical properties such as molecular weight, and a CMC blend amount is reduced so as to increase the slurry solid content and reduce the resistance of a battery (abstract). The slurry (may be considered primer composition) includes solid components such as an active material, a conductive material, a CMC thickening agent and an SBR binder, which are actually added in predetermined amounts, and the liquid component (may be considered primer composition) may refer to water included in CMC and an SBR solution and water that may be additionally added to regulate viscosity. The higher the slurry solid content, the higher the capacity of the battery [0016-0017; 0021].
The thickening agent may be a cellulose-based polymer which includes one or more selected from the group consisting of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), methyl cellulose (MC), hydroxypropyl cellulose (HPC), methyl hydroxypropyl cellulose (MHPC), ethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose (EHEC), methyl ethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose (MEHEC), and cellulose gum. The thickening agent may be CMC [0013]. The CMC imparts a high thickening property and an excellent coating property while contributing to an adhesive strength of a current collector to prevent an active material from being detached from the current collector, and also exhibits excellent cycle characteristics [0014].
CMC having a degree of substitution (DS) of 0.7 to 1.3, more preferably 0.7 to 0.9, may be used as the carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC). Generally, the higher the degree of substitution, the more hydrophilic the CMC. As a result, the CMC has a characteristic of being easily dissolved. [0025-0026]. CMC having a molecular weight of 700,000 to 4,200,000, more preferably 700,000 to 3,500,000, may be used as the carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) [0028-0030]. The carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention may be included at a content of 1% by weight or less based on the total weight of the anode slurry [0032].
Possible binders are disclosed at [0038]. More preferably, the binder may be a styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR). The styrene-butadiene rubber may have an effect of a binder due to a strong adhesive strength even when used in a small amount. In this case, the styrene-butadiene rubber serving as the binder may be suitably mixed with the aforementioned carboxymethyl cellulose, which has high water solubility and good characteristics as the thickening agent, to prepare an aqueous electrode [0039].
A solvent used to prepare the anode slurry is not particularly limited as long as the solvent may be used to properly dissolve CMC. For example, an aqueous solvent may include water or an organic solvent (i.e., a lower alcohol or a lower ketone) that may be uniformly mixed with water, and a non-aqueous solvent may, for example, include N-methyl pyrrolidone (NMP), and the like [0040].
Yoo does not explicitly teach “an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total solid weight of the primer composition”, as recited by at least claim 1. However, Yoo teaches the solvent must properly dissolve CMC. Yoo teaches CMC having a degree of substitution of 0.7-0.9 has a characteristic of being easily dissolved. Yoo teaches when the degree of substitution is less than 0.7, a large amount of a non-dissolved substance referred to as a microgel remains because CMC is not completely dissolved when CMC is dissolved in distilled water due to low water solubility. This causes additional aggregation during preparation of slurry and surface defects (i.e., pin holes) of the electrode after coating. When the degree of substitution is greater than 0.9, solubility may be improved due to high hydrophilicity, but the CMC adsorption amount may be reduced due to a low affinity to the active material [0027]. Thus, one of skill in the art would have found CMC having a DS of 0.7-0.9 to be completely or almost completely dissolved in the solvent, as taught by Yoo. Yoo teaches non-dissolved thickener substance is to be avoided as the non-dissolved substance caused aggregation during preparation of the slurry and surface defects in the produced electrode. Examiner notes claim 11 encompasses an embodiment wherein the “primer layer” and “anode-active material layer” comprise the same elements. Therefore, one of skill would have found the anode of claim 11 obvious over the anode of Yoo.
Regarding the viscosity limitation of claim 6, see Table 2 of Yoo. The conductive material may be artificial graphite, natural graphite, carbon black, acetylene black, Ketjen black, Denka black, thermal black, channel black, carbon fiber, metal fiber, aluminum, tin, bismuth, silicon, antimony, nickel, copper, titanium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, zinc, molybdenum, tungsten, silver, gold, lanthanum, ruthenium, platinum, iridium, titanium dioxide, polyaniline, poythiophene, polyacetylene, polypyrrole, or a combination thereof may be used as the conductive material. Generally, a carbon black-based conductive material may be often used [0047].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specification
The objection to the specification is maintained (see above). The specification remains replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
35 USC 112
Examiner has given a detailed analysis in finding claim 1 indefinite under 35 USC 112. Applicant has not specifically addressed the analysis provided by the Examiner. It remains unclear what “undissolved residue of thickener”, if any, the primer composition of claim 1 contains. In addition, “a total weight of solids of the primer composition” is indefinite as claim 1 does not particularly point out or distinctly recite what encompasses “a total weight of solids”. Thus, it is unclear what the undissolved residue of the thickener is “based on”. At least Example 1 of the present specification teaches “the thickener undissolved reside was removed to prepare a primer composition” [0088] [0094-00100].
Examiner notes at least claim 1 is significantly broader than any of the examples provided in the present specification. The examples in the description are not commensurate in scope with at least claim 1. Example 1 requires:
[0088] A CMC (carboxymethyl cellulose, a substitution degree of 0.7, a weight-average molecular weight of 400,000) as a thickener was dissolved in pure water such that it has a solid content of 0.6 wt% to prepare a CMC solution. The prepared CMC solution was mixed with a SBR (styrene-butadiene rubber, a solid content of 40 wt%, a pH of 8, a particle size of 150 nm, a Tg of 2*C) suspension as a binder to prepare a mixture. Thereafter, the mixture was filtered using a filter, and the thickener undissolved residue was removed to prepare a primer composition. A content of the SBR solid and a content of the CMC solid in the prepared primer composition, a filter size, the number of filtering, and a content of the solid in the primer composition were shown in Table 1 below.
Thus, Applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive and the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 112.
Kobayashi
Examiner notes at least claim 1 has been rejected as indefinite and Example 1 of the present specification teaches the thickener undissolved residue was removed to prepare a primer composition. Furthermore, “for forming a primer layer on a surface of a current collector” is an intended use limitation that has not been given patentable weight. At least claim 1 is directed toward a primer composition.
Applicant argues Kobayashi does not explicitly teach the undissolved residue of the thickener limitation, as recited by claim 1. Examiner notes the claims have been rejected as obvious in view of Kobayashi. Examiner requests Applicant identify the sections of Kobayashi that teach “completely dissolving of the hydrophilic polymer”. Kobayashi does not explicitly teach “an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total solid weight of the primer composition”, as recited by at least claim 1. However, Kobayashi teaches the hydrophilic polymer (cellulose derivative; hydroxybutyl chitosan) is dissolved in the polar solvent [0100]. Thus, one of skill in the art would have found the hydrophilic polymer having an undissolved residue of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% obvious in view of the teaching by Kobayashi that the hydrophilic polymer is dissolved in the polar solvent. Applicant has not addressed the motivation statement provided by the Examiner. One of skill would have found a slight amount of 0.005 wt% obvious in view of the teachings of Kobayashi that the CMC is dissolved in the polar solvent.
Comparative Example 1 of the present specification is clearly not representative of Kobayashi, as Kobayashi teaches CMC. Furthermore, Comparative Example 2 and Comparative Example 3 are not representative of Kobayashi, as Kobayashi teaches the coating liquid contains a polar solvent such as N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) or N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone, a hydrophilic polymer such as a chitosan derivative or a cellulose derivative, and polyvinylidene fluoride. Any evidence of unexpected results must distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art of record. No evidence of unexpected results has been provided. Examiner again notes Tables 1-3 are not commensurate in scope with at least claim 1 directed toward a primer composition (not an anode, not a battery). Furthermore, Comparative Example 1 contains zero CMC undissolved residue because the primer composition slurry does not contain CMC at all. Kobayashi clearly does not correspond to Comparative Example 1.
Claim 1 recites “the undissolved residue of the thickener having a particle size capable of passing through a 120 mesh filter”. The specification discloses a 120 mesh filter has a size of 125 m. Furthermore, it appears the undissolved residue is contained in an intermediate product before being removed from the primer composition. Examiner notes the claim recites “capable of”.
Yoo
Examiner notes at least claim 1 has been rejected as indefinite and Example 1 of the present specification teaches the thickener undissolved residue was removed to prepare a primer composition.
Applicant argues Yoo does not explicitly teach the undissolved residue of the thickener limitation, as recited by claim 1. Examiner notes the claims have been rejected as obvious in view of Yoo. Examiner requests Applicant identify the sections of Yoo that teach “completely dissolving”, as argued on page 9 of the amendment. Yoo does not explicitly teach “an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total solid weight of the primer composition”, as recited by at least claim 1. However, Yoo teaches the solvent must properly dissolve CMC. Yoo teaches CMC having a degree of substitution of 0.7-0.9 has a characteristic of being easily dissolved. Yoo teaches when the degree of substitution is less than 0.7, a large amount of a non-dissolved substance referred to as a microgel remains because CMC is not completely dissolved when CMC is dissolved in distilled water due to low water solubility. This causes additional aggregation during preparation of slurry and surface defects (i.e., pin holes) of the electrode after coating. When the degree of substitution is greater than 0.9, solubility may be improved due to high hydrophilicity, but the CMC adsorption amount may be reduced due to a low affinity to the active material [0027]. Thus, one of skill in the art would have found CMC having a DS of 0.7-0.9 to be completely or almost completely dissolved in the solvent, as taught by Yoo. Yoo teaches non-dissolved thickener substance is to be avoided as the non-dissolved substance caused aggregation during preparation of the slurry and surface defects in the produced electrode. Applicant has not address the Examiner’s motivation statement.
Comparative Example 1 of the present specification is clearly not representative of Yoo, as Yoo teaches CMC. Furthermore, Comparative Example 2 and Comparative Example 3 are not representative of Yoo, as Yoo teaches CMC having a degree of substitution of 0.7-0.9. Any evidence of unexpected results must distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art of record. No evidence of unexpected results has been provided. Examiner again notes Tables 1-3 are not commensurate in scope with at least claim 1 directed toward a primer composition (not an anode, not a battery).
Applicant cites case law, but no analysis stating how the case law is applicable to the rejections of record has been provided.
Claim 1 recites “the undissolved residue of the thickener having a particle size capable of passing through a 120 mesh filter”. The specification discloses a 120 mesh filter has a size of 125 mm. Furthermore, it appears the undissolved residue is contained in an intermediate product before being removed from the primer composition. Examiner notes the claim recites “capable of”.
Examiner has copied previous arguments below:
Applicant argued Yoo differs from the present invention in that it pertains to CMC included in the “active material layer”, unlike the claimed invention. Examiner disagrees. The claimed invention broadly recites “a primer composition comprising”, which has been given the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Applicant argued Yoo does not provide any disclosure regarding the specific numerical value of the undissolved residue content of the thickener in the primer composition. The present rejection in view of Yoo does not rely on anticipation. Yoo does not explicitly teach “an undissolved residue of the thickener of 0.0005 wt% to 0.05 wt% based on a total solid weight of the primer composition”, as recited by at least claim 1. However, Yoo teaches the solvent must properly dissolve CMC. Yoo teaches CMC having a degree of substitution of 0.7-0.9 has a characteristic of being easily dissolved. Yoo teaches when the degree of substitution is less than 0.7, a large amount of a non-dissolved substance referred to as a microgel remains because CMC is not completely dissolved when CMC is dissolved in distilled water due to low water solubility. This causes additional aggregation during preparation of slurry and surface defects (i.e., pin holes) of the electrode after coating. When the degree of substitution is greater than 0.9, solubility may be improved due to high hydrophilicity, but the CMC adsorption amount may be reduced due to a low affinity to the active material [0027]. Thus, one of skill in the art would have found CMC having a DS of 0.7-0.9 to be completely or almost completely dissolved in the solvent, as taught by Yoo. Yoo teaches non-dissolved thickener substance is to be avoided as the non-dissolved substance caused aggregation during preparation of the slurry and surface defects in the produced electrode. Applicant does not address the motivation statement provided by the Examiner supporting obviousness over Yoo.
Applicant argued the undissolved residue content of the thickener of Yoo corresponds to comparative example 2 in Table 1 of the present invention. Examiner disagrees as comparative example 2 is clearly not representative of the broader teachings of Yoo. Yoo clearly teaches the solvent must properly dissolve CMC. Yoo teaches CMC having a degree of substitution of 0.7-0.9 has a characteristic of being easily dissolved. Yoo teaches when the degree of substitution is less than 0.7, a large amount of a non-dissolved substance referred to as a microgel remains because CMC is not completely dissolved when CMC is dissolved in distilled water due to low water solubility. This causes additional aggregation during preparation of slurry and surface defects (i.e., pin holes) of the electrode after coating. Yoo teaches non-dissolved thickener substance is to be avoided.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Han (US2022/0344672 A1) teaches a current collector having improved adhesive strength including a metal foil and a primer coating layer formed on at least one surface of the metal foil, wherein the surface of the primer coating layer is a flat surface that is rolled so as to be evenly flat (abstract).
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 TRACY DOVE whose telephone number is (571)272-1285. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-3:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/TRACY M DOVE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights