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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 8, Paragraph 2 of applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) under Lee(US 20250022751 A1, hereafter Lee) 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 over Choi et al.(US 20080174021 A1, hereafter Choi) in view of Lee et al.(US 20100052169 A1, hereafter Lee 2), Chen et al.(US 20210351072 A1, hereafter Chen) and Basker et al.(US 20180211875 A1, hereafter Basker). Furthermore, a new rejection is also made over Lee in view of Lee 2 and Basker. Applicant’s argument that Lee’s gradients are structurally and functionally different from the two-layer structure recited in amended claim 1 is persuasive. However, the differences between Lee and claim 1, mainly in the specific composition of the second layer and the fact that this structure is part of a transistor structure, would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, based on the facts that Lee discloses an underlying semiconductor layer as the point of contact with their feature(See paragraph 0028 of Lee) and guidance on the composition of their metal nitride layers(See paragraphs 0078, 0096 of Lee). A full rejection is provided below.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 8, Paragraph 3 of applicant’s arguments, filed 01/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) in view of Mukae(US 20200395310 A1, hereafter Mukae) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. The amendment successfully overcomes the prior art of Mukae.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 14, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee, Chen, and Basker.
Regarding Claim 1, Choi discloses:
An integrated circuit(IC) device(Fig. 8), comprising:
A semiconductor material(Fig. 8 [100]);
An insulating material(Fig. 8 [110]); and
A contact(Fig. 8 [150/140/130/120]) in an opening(Fig. 8 [115]) of the insulating material(Fig. 8 [110]) and extending to a portion of the semiconductor material(Fig. 8 [100]),
Wherein:
The contact(Fig. 8 [150/140/130/120]) includes a first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]) on at least sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 8 [115]), a second layer(Fig. 8 [130]) on the first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]), and a fill material(Fig. 8 [150]),
The first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]) is a layer of molybdenum(See paragraph 0033),
The second layer(Fig. 8 [130]) includes molybdenum and nitrogen(See paragraph 0036),
The second layer(Fig. 8 [130]) is between the first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]) and the fill material(Fig. 8 [150]).
Choi does not teach or disclose that the contact is a source contact or a drain connect of a transistor.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a contact(Fig. 7 [200/210]) which is a source contact or a drain contact of a transistor(See paragraph 0080).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Choi into a transistor as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect transistor structures to other components vertically above the transistor structures. Implementing Choi’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor structure with a contact connected to a source or drain.
Further, Choi does not teach or disclose a thickness of the first layer is greater than a thickness of the second layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses a first layer(Fig. 4 [220]) with a greater thickness(8 to 10 angstrom, See paragraph 0057) than a second layer(Fig. 4 [218], 2 to 6 angstrom, See paragraph 0056).
It would have been further obvious to form Choi’s device along the lines of Chen. One might have been motivated to produce Choi’s layers with the respective dimensions due to the fact that Choi does not provide a set value for the expected thickness of respective layers, leading one of ordinary skill in the art to look to the prior art for guidance on the producing of these two barrier layers disclosed by Choi. Producing Choi’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Choi’s device with a set of known thicknesses of the two barrier layers.
Further, Choi discloses that the atomic percentage of nitrogen in a second barrier layer(Fig. 8 [130]) is less than an atomic percentage of nitrogen in a deposition resistant layer(Fig. 8 [140a]).
However, Choi does not specifically teach or disclose that the second layer includes at least 20 atomic percent nitrogen and at least 60 atomic percent molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee 2 discloses a second layer(Fig. 1 [122]) which contains between 30 and 60 percent Molybdenum and between 70 and 40 percent nitrogen, which overlaps with the claimed range(See paragraph 0044 of Lee 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to further modify the device disclosed by Choi along the lines of Lee 2. One might have been motivated to produce Choi’s layer with Lee 2’s atomic percentages in order to fulfill the suggestion Choi provides, in that it would be impossible to satisfy the suggestion that the second barrier layer contains a smaller nitrogen content, if, for example, both the deposition resistant layer and second barrier layers contained Molybdenum nitride with a 1:1 Mo:N ratio. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Choi’s device with an atomic percentage of nitrogen and molybdenum set by Lee 2.
Regarding Claim 14,
Choi discloses an electrode(Fig. 8 [150/140/130/120]) including a first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]), a second layer(Fig. 8 [130]), and a fill material(Fig. 8 [150]),
The fill material(Fig. 8 [150]) includes an electrically conductive material(aluminum, See paragraph 0007),
The first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]) is a layer of molybdenum(See paragraph 0033),
The second layer(Fig. 8 [130]) is between the first layer(Fig. 8 [120a]) and the fill material(Fig. 8 [150]) and in contact with the fill material(Fig. 8 [150]).
Choi does not teach or disclose a transistor comprising a semiconductor material, a source electrode, and a drain electrode wherein at least one of the source or drain electrode includes the structure above.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a transistor(Fig. 7) comprising a semiconductor material(Fig. 7 [110]), a source electrode(Fig. 7 [210/200]), a drain electrode(See Fig. 7 below), wherein
At least one of the source electrode or drain electrode contains a contact(Fig. 7 [200/210]).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Choi into a transistor as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect transistor structures to other components vertically above the transistor structures. Implementing Choi’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor structure with a contact connected to a source or drain.
Further, Choi discloses that the atomic percentage of nitrogen in a second barrier layer(Fig. 8 [130]) is less than an atomic percentage of nitrogen in a deposition resistant layer(Fig. 8 [140a]).
However, Choi does not specifically teach or disclose that the second layer includes at least 20 atomic percent nitrogen and at least 60 atomic percent molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee 2 discloses a second layer(Fig. 1 [122]) which contains between 30 and 60 percent Molybdenum and between 70 and 40 percent nitrogen, which overlaps with the claimed range(See paragraph 0044 of Lee).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to further modify the device disclosed by Choi along the lines of Lee 2. One might have been motivated to produce Choi’s layer with Lee 2’s atomic percentages in order to fulfill the suggestion Choi provides, in that it would be impossible to satisfy the suggestion that the second barrier layer contains a smaller nitrogen content, if, for example, both the deposition resistant layer and second barrier layers contained Molybdenum nitride with a 1:1 Mo:N ratio. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Choi’s device with an atomic percentage of nitrogen and molybdenum set by Lee 2.
Regarding Claim 19,
Claim 19 appears to be claim 1 re-written in method form. Therefore claim 19 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 with the same arguments as the rejection of claim 1 contained therein.
Regarding Claim 20, Choi further discloses:
Depositing a layer of titanium(Fig. 7 [120a], See paragraph 0033) along the sidewalls and the bottom of the opening before providing the first layer(Fig. 7 [130]).
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-19, 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee 2 and Basker.
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses:
An integrated circuit device(Fig. 2) comprising:
A semiconductor material(See paragraph 0028, “underlying layers”);
An insulating material(See paragraph 0028, “dielectric layer”); and
A contact(Fig. 2 [202]) in an opening of the insulating material(See above) and extending to a portion of the semiconductor material(See above),
Wherein:
the contact(Fig. 2 [202]) includes a first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) on at least sidewalls of the opening, a second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) on the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]), and a fill material(Fig. 2 [216]),
the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is a layer of molybdenum(See paragraphs 0088, 0096-0098),
the second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) includes molybdenum and nitrogen(See paragraph 0034),
the second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is between the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) and the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]),
a thickness of the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is greater(10 to 100 angstroms, see paragraph 0038) is greater than a thickness of the second layer(Fig. 2 [214], less than 10 angstroms, See paragraph 0012).
Lee does not teach or disclose that the contact is a source contact or a drain connect of a transistor.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a contact(Fig. 7 [200/210]) which is a source contact or a drain contact of a transistor(See paragraph 0080).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Lee into a transistor as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect transistor structures to other components vertically above the transistor structures. Implementing Lee’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor structure with a contact connected to a source or drain.
Further, Lee discloses that the atomic percentage of nitrogen in a second nitride layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is less than an atomic percentage of nitrogen in a first nitride layer(Fig. 2 [208], See paragraph 0014)
However, Lee does not specifically teach or disclose that the second layer includes at least 20 atomic percent nitrogen and at least 60 atomic percent molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee 2 discloses a second layer(Fig. 1 [122]) which contains between 30 and 60 percent Molybdenum and between 70 and 40 percent nitrogen, which overlaps with the claimed range(See paragraph 0044 of Lee 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to further modify the device disclosed by Lee along the lines of Lee 2. One might have been motivated to produce Lee’s layer with Lee 2’s atomic percentages in order to fulfill the suggestion Lee provides, in that it would be impossible to satisfy the suggestion that the second nitride layer contains a smaller nitrogen content, if, for example, both the first and second nitride layers contained molybdenum nitride with a 1:1 Mo:N ratio. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Lee’s device with an atomic percentage of nitrogen and molybdenum set by Lee 2.
Regarding Claim 2,
Lee further discloses a thickness of the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) having a thickness between 0.5 and 10 nanometers(See Paragraph 0090).
Lee does not explicitly disclose the range of 5 to 16 nanometers.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to arrive at the claimed range. In cases where claimed ranges have significant overlap, a prima facie case of obviousness is made. One might have arrived at the claimed range from the prior art of Lee as a matter of routine experimentation or device optimization. Producing the device in this way would have generated a predictable result in an embodiment of Lee’s device within a portion of Lee’s disclosed range.
Regarding Claim 3, Lee further discloses an atomic percentage of molybdenum in the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is about 80%(See paragraph 0097, wherein deposition involves producing a Mo layer).
Regarding Claim 4, Lee further discloses the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]) includes an electrically conductive material(See paragraph 0056, “bulk metal”).
Regarding Claim 5, Lee further discloses
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) has a thickness between about 0.5 and 2.5 nanometers(See paragraph 0064, “less than 15 angstroms”).
Regarding Claim 6, Lee further discloses:
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is in direct physical contact with the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]).
Regarding Claim 9, Lee further discloses:
The fill material(Fig. 2 [216]) includes a first electrically conductive material(“bulk metal”, See paragraph 0056),
The contact(Fig. 2) further includes a second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]),
The second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) is at least on sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 2 [202]), and
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is between the second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) and the first electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [212]).
Regarding Claim 10, Lee further discloses:
The second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) includes titanium(See paragraph 0060, “TiN”).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee further discloses:
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) has a thickness between 0.5 and 2.5 nanometers(See paragraph 0064, “less than 15 angstroms”), and
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is between the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) and the first electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [216]).
Regarding Claim 12, Lee further discloses:
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is in direct physical contact with the first electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [216])
Regarding Claim 13,
Lee discloses a device in accordance with most of the limitations of claim 1.
Lee does not teach or disclose the semiconductor material has a shape of a fin.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a semiconductor material(Fig. 9 [10]) in the shape of a fin(See paragraph 0044, “finFET”).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Lee into a fin as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect the fin channel structure of a finFET to other components vertically above the finFET structures. Implementing Lee’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a finFET with a contact in accordance with Lee’s device.
Regarding Claim 14, Lee discloses an electrode(Fig. 2) including a first layer(Fig. 2 [212]), a second layer(Fig. 2 [214]), and a fill material(Fig. 2 [216]),
The fill material(Fig. 2 [216]) includes an electrically conductive material(See paragraph 0056, “bulk metal”)
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is a layer of molybdenum(See paragraph 0097);
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is between the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) and the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]) and in contact with the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]).
Lee does not teach or disclose a transistor comprising a semiconductor material, a source electrode, and a drain electrode wherein at least one of the source or drain electrode includes the structure above.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a transistor(Fig. 7) comprising a semiconductor material(Fig. 7 [110]), a source electrode(Fig. 7 [210/200]), a drain electrode(See Fig. 7 below), wherein
At least one of the source electrode or drain electrode contains a contact(Fig. 7 [200/210]).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Lee into a transistor as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect transistor structures to other components vertically above the transistor structures. Implementing Lee’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor structure with a contact connected to a source or drain.
Lee also discloses that the second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) has a higher gradient nitride content than another nitride layer(Fig. 2 [208], See paragraph 0041).
However, Lee does not specifically teach or disclose that the second layer includes at least 20 atomic percent nitrogen and at least 60 atomic percent molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee 2 discloses a second layer(Fig. 1 [122]) which contains between 30 and 60 percent Molybdenum and between 70 and 40 percent nitrogen, which overlaps with the claimed range(See paragraph 0044 of Lee).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to further modify the device disclosed by Lee along the lines of Lee 2. One might have been motivated to produce Lee’s layer with Lee 2’s atomic percentages in order to fulfill the suggestion Lee provides, in that it would be impossible to satisfy the suggestion that the layer of Fig. 2 214 has a greater nitrogen content, if, for example, both the first and second gradient nitride layers contained Molybdenum nitride with a 1:1 Mo:N ratio. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Lee’s device with an atomic percentage of nitrogen and molybdenum set by Lee 2.
Regarding Claim 15,
Lee does not teach or disclose a transistor further comprising an insulating material, and
At least one of the source electrode or the drain electrode is in an opening of the insulating material.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a transistor(Fig. 9) further comprising an insulating material(Fig. 9 [180]), and
At least one of the source electrode(Fig. 9 [210]) or the drain electrode(Fig. 9 [210]) is in an opening of the insulating material(Fig. 9 [180])
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to implement Lee’s structure in the transistor disclosed by Basker. It is common practice in the art to surround a contact structure with an insulating layer in order to avoid unwanted conduction between components, as is shown by the device disclosed by Basker. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor with a contact structure as the one disclosed by Lee.
Regarding Claim 16, Lee further discloses:
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is at least on sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 2 [202]) and is between the insulating material(See paragraph 0028, dielectric layer) and the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]).
Regarding Claim 17, Lee further discloses:
The electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [216]) is a first electrically conductive material,
The at least one of the structure(Fig. 2) further includes a second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]), TiN, See paragraph 0060),
The second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) is at least on sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 2 [205]), and
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is between the first electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [216]) and the second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]).
Regarding Claim 18, Lee further discloses:
The second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) includes titanium(TiN).
Regarding Claim 19, Lee discloses:
A method of manufacturing an integrated circuit device(Fig. 2), the method comprising:
Providing a semiconductor material(See paragraph 0028, “underlying layer”);
Providing an insulating material(See paragraph 0028, “dielectric layer”);
Providing a contact(Fig. 2),
Wherein:
The contact(Fig. 2) is in an opening of the insulating material(See paragraph 0028, “dielectric layer”) and extends to a portion of the semiconductor material(See paragraph 0028, “underlying layer”),
The contact(Fig. 2) includes a first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) on at least sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 2 [205]), a second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) on the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]), and a fill material(Fig. 2 [216]),
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is a layer of molybdenum(See paragraph 0097),
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) includes molybdenum and nitrogen(See paragraph 0077),
The second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) is between the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) and the fill material(Fig. 2 [216]),
A thickness(1-10 nm, See paragraph 0038) of the first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is greater than a thickness(under 1 nm, See paragraph 0054) of the second layer(Fig. 2 [214]).
Lee does not teach or disclose a transistor comprising the above contact.
In the same field of endeavor, Basker discloses a transistor(Fig. 7) comprising a semiconductor material(Fig. 7 [110]), a source electrode(Fig. 7 [210/200]), a drain electrode(See Fig. 7 below), wherein
At least one of the source electrode or drain electrode contains a contact(Fig. 7 [200/210]).
It would have been obvious to implement the contact disclosed by Lee into a transistor as disclosed by Basker. Contact structures are commonly used in the are as a way to connect transistor structures to other components vertically above the transistor structures. Implementing Lee’s device in this way would have generated a predictable result in the creation of a transistor structure with a contact connected to a source or drain.
Lee also discloses that the second layer(Fig. 2 [214]) has a higher gradient nitride content than another nitride layer(Fig. 2 [208], See paragraph 0041).
However, Lee does not specifically teach or disclose that the second layer includes at least 20 atomic percent nitrogen and at least 60 atomic percent molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee 2 discloses a second layer(Fig. 1 [122]) which contains between 30 and 60 percent Molybdenum and between 70 and 40 percent nitrogen, which overlaps with the claimed range(See paragraph 0044 of Lee).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to further modify the device disclosed by Lee along the lines of Lee 2. One might have been motivated to produce Lee’s layer with Lee 2’s atomic percentages in order to fulfill the suggestion Lee provides, in that it would be impossible to satisfy the suggestion that the layer of Fig. 2 214 has a greater nitrogen content, if, for example, both the first and second gradient nitride layers contained Molybdenum nitride with a 1:1 Mo:N ratio. Performing this production would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Lee’s device with an atomic percentage of nitrogen and molybdenum set by Lee 2.
Regarding Claim 21, Lee further discloses:
The first layer(Fig. 2 [212]) is in direct physical contact with the second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]).
Regarding Claim 22, Lee further discloses:
The second electrically conductive material(Fig. 2 [204/206]) is in direct physical contact with the sidewalls of the opening(Fig. 2 [205]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chan et al.(US 6903013 B2) discloses a barrier structure comprising molybdenum. Smith et al.(US 20220270979 A1) discloses a nucleation layer comprising TiN. Hsiao et al.(US 20220285264 A1) discloses a barrier layer comprising molybdenum nitride. Adusumilli et al.(US 20170117371 A1) discloses a contact structure with a molybdenum barrier layer.
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 MARSHALL MU-NUO HATFIELD whose telephone number is (703)756-1506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 11:00 AM-9:00PM EST.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/MARSHALL MU-NUO HATFIELD/Examiner, Art Unit 2897