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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/23/26 was filed in a timely manner; thus, the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) # have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim #1-3, 8-19, 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GIRARD (U.S. Pub. No, 2019/0311894), hereinafter referred to as "Girard" as modified by Fukazawa et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0118667), hereinafter referred to as "Fukazawa" and in further view of Bernhardt et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0276922), hereinafter referred to as "Bernhardt".
Girard shows, with respect to claim #1, a method of processing a substrate comprising: (a) forming a first film on the substrate (paragraph 0150) by supplying a film-forming agent to the substrate (paragraph 0511, 0514); (b) adding oxygen to the first film by supplying a first oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing a part of the first film, creating an oxygen-added first film; and (by purging and repeating the oxidation) changing the oxygen-added first film into a second film including an oxide film by supplying a second oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing the oxygen-added first film (multiple processes; paragraph 0505, 0548).
Girard substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #1 above, including the use of H2 and H radicals as reducing gas (paragraph 0487).
Girard fails to show, with respect to claim #1, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas.
Fukazawa teaches, with respect to claim #1, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas (paragraph 0018, 0022) and a reducing gas (paragraph 0071) an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition (paragraph 0023, 0063, 0069, 0077) wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas (eiii, which is a repetition of ei and eii; paragraph 0067), O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas (paragraph 0018, 0022, 0052), and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas (paragraph 0025, 0065, 0078, 0086).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #1, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, which teaches, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas, to incorporate a structural condition with modify surface properties wherein often used to enhance adhesion and bonding, particularly in microelectronics and other applications where a hydrophilic and well-understood surface chemistry is desirable, as taught by Fukazawa.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown the rejection of claim #1 above.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa, fail to show, with respect to claim #1, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film.
Bernhardt teaches, with respect to claim #1, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film (paragraph 0008-0009, 0016) (repeating process for desired thickness; Paragraph 0027).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #1, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, with the modification of the invention of Bernhardt which teaches, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film, to incorporate a process that would provide not only the desired thickness but also tunnelable content, as taught by Bernhardt.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa and Bernhardt, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown the rejection of claim #1 above.
Girard fails to explicitly show, with respect to claim #2, a method wherein the oxidation of part of the first film by the first oxidizing agent in (b) is performed under a lower oxidizing power condition than the oxidation of the oxygen-added first film by the second oxidizing agent.
Fukazawa teaches, with respect to claim #2, a method wherein the oxidation of the part of the first film by the first oxidizing agent in (b) is performed under a lower oxidizing power condition (Treatment #1; paragraph 0077) than the oxidation of the oxygen-added first film (Treatment #2; paragraph 0078) by the second oxidizing agent (paragraph 0078, 0080).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #2, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, which teaches, a method wherein the oxidation of the part of the first film by the first oxidizing agent in (b) is performed under a lower oxidizing power condition than the oxidation of the oxygen-added first film by the second oxidizing agent, to incorporate a structural condition that would reach the desired thickness of the outer layer, as taught by Fukazawa.
Girard shows, with respect to claim #3, a method wherein in (b), the first film is oxidized in an unsaturated manner, and in (c), the oxygen-added first film is oxidized in a saturated manner (paragraph 0156).
Girard fails to explicitly show, with respect to claim #5, a method wherein the first oxidizing agent includes a first oxidizing gas, and the second oxidizing agent includes a second oxidizing gas and a reducing gas.
Girard shows, with respect to claim #8, a method wherein the first film contains a first element and a second element, and the second film contains the first element and oxygen (paragraph 0156-0157).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #9, a method wherein the first element includes a metal element or a semiconductor element, and the second element includes nitrogen (paragraph 0150-0157).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #10, a method wherein the film-forming agent includes a precursor containing the first element and a halogen element, and a reactant containing the second element, and in (a), supplying the precursor to the substrate and supplying the reactant to the substrate are alternately performed (paragraph 0150-0157).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #11, a method wherein the precursor is a halosilane-based gas, and the reactant is a hydrogen-nitride-based gas (paragraph 0150-0160).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #12, a method wherein a temperature of the substrate in (a) is equal to or lower than the temperature of the substrate in (c) (paragraph 0220-0230).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #13, a method wherein a temperature of the substrate in (a) is lower than the temperature of the substrate in (c) (paragraph 0220-0230).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #14, a method wherein a temperature of the substrate in (a) is 500 degrees C or lower, and the temperature of the substrate in (c) is 500 degrees C or lower (paragraph 0220-0230).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #15, a method wherein a temperature of the substrate in (a) is 450 degrees C or lower, and the temperature of the substrate in (c) is 450 degrees C or lower (paragraph 0220-0230).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #16, a method wherein a cycle including (a), (b), and (c) is performed multiple times (paragraph 0505).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #17, a method wherein a cycle that includes performing a set including (a) and (b) multiple times and performing (c) is performed a predetermined number of times (paragraph 0505).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #18, a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device (paragraph 0337) comprising the method of processing a substrate comprising: (a) forming a first film on the substrate (paragraph 0150) by supplying a film-forming agent to the substrate (paragraph 0511, 0514); (b) adding oxygen to the first film by supplying a first oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing a part of the first film; and (by purging and repeating the oxidation) changing the oxygen-added first film into a second film including an oxide film by supplying a second oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing the oxygen-added first film (paragraph 0548).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #19, substrate processing system, comprising: a film-forming part configured to form a first film on a substrate (paragraph 0150) by supplying a film-forming agent to the substrate (paragraph 0511, 0514); a first oxidation part configured to add oxygen to the first film by supplying a first oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing a part of the first film; and a second oxidation part configured to change the oxygen-added first film into a second film including an oxide film by supplying a second oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing the oxygen-added first film (paragraph 0480, 0505, 0548).
Girard substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #19 above.
Girard fails to show, with respect to claim #19, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas.
Fukazawa teaches, with respect to claim #19, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas (paragraph 0018, 0022) and a reducing gas (paragraph 0071)an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition (paragraph 0023, 0063, 0069, 0077) wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas ( eiii which is a repetition of ei and eii; paragraph 0067), O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas (paragraph 0018, 0022, 0052), and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas (paragraph 0025, 0065, 0078, 0086).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #19, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, which teaches, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas, to incorporate a structural condition with modify surface properties wherein often used to enhance adhesion and bonding, particularly in microelectronics and other applications where a hydrophilic and well-understood surface chemistry is desirable, as taught by Fukazawa.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa and Bernhardt, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown the rejection of claim #1 above.
Girard fails to show, with respect to claim #21, a method wherein the first film includes a silicon nitride film, and the second film includes a silicon oxide film.
Fukazawa teaches, with respect to claim #21, a method wherein the first film includes a silicon nitride film, and the second film includes a silicon oxide film (paragraph 0008, 0012).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #21, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, which teaches, a method wherein the first film includes a silicon nitride film, and the second film includes a silicon oxide film, to incorporate a structural condition with modify surface properties wherein often used to enhance adhesion and bonding, particularly in microelectronics and other applications where a hydrophilic and well-understood surface chemistry is desirable, as taught by Fukazawa.
Girard shows, with respect to claim #22, a method of processing a substrate wherein a temperature of the substrate in (b) is equal to or lower than a temperature of the substrate in at least one selected from the group of (a) and (c) (paragraph 0250, 0280).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #23, a method of processing a substrate wherein a temperature of the substrate in (b) is equal to or lower than a temperature of the substrate in at least one selected from the group of (a) and (c) (paragraph 0250, 0280).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #24, a method of processing a substrate wherein a temperature of the substrate in (b) is lower than a temperature of the substrate in each of (a) and (c) (paragraph 0250, 0280).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #25, a method of processing a substrate wherein the first film contains a higher number of N-H bonds than a number of N-H bonds in the second film (paragraph 0202, 0218, 0303).
The Examiner notes that Girard does not state explicitly that first and second films have different concentration of N-H bonds. However, the Examiner notes that Girard shows a method of depositing a choice of various concentration of N-H bonds on surfaces. Furthermore, the Examiner notes that Girard disclosed the claimed invention except for requiring wherein the first film contains a higher number of N-H bonds than a number of N-H bonds in the second film. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose wherein the first film contains a higher number of N-H bonds than a number of N-H bonds in the second film, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. in re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The Examiner further notes that with the claimed method, nowhere has it been shown how the choice of having first film contains a higher number of N-H bonds than a number of N-H bonds in the second film, departs/changes the process of depositing a N-H bond group. Therefore, the Examiner takes the position that the applicant has not established the critical nature of requiring wherein the first film contains a higher number of N-H bonds than a number of N-H bonds in the second film, the method of depositing the N-H component. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990). To establish unexpected results over a claimed range, applicants should compare a sufficient number of tests inside and outside the claimed range to show criticality of the claimed range. In re Hill, 284 F.2d 955, 128 USPQ 197(CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have various ranges.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown the rejection of claim #1 above.
Girard as modified by Fukazawa, fail to show, with respect to claim #26, a method wherein, the second oxidizing agent and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously into a process chamber containing the substrate.
Bernhardt teaches, with respect to claim #26, a method wherein, the second oxidizing agent and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously into a process chamber containing the substrate (paragraph 0008-0009, 0016) (repeating process for desired thickness; Paragraph 0027).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #26, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa, with the modification of the invention of Bernhardt which teaches, a method wherein, the second oxidizing agent and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously into a process chamber containing the substrate, to incorporate a process that would provide not only the desired thickness but also tunnelable content, as taught by Bernhardt.
Girard shows, with respect to claim #27, a method of wherein the oxidizing species includes atomic oxygen (paragraph 0485).
Girard shows, with respect to claim #28, a method of wherein the oxidizing species includes moisture (H20)-free oxidizing species (paragraph 0485).
//
Claim #20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GIRARD (U.S. Pub. No, 2019/0311894), hereinafter referred to as "Girard" as modified by ASHIHARA et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0249256), hereinafter referred to as "Ashihara" and Fukazawa et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0118667), hereinafter referred to as "Fukazawa", and in further view of Bernhardt et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2005/0276922), hereinafter referred to as "Bernhardt".
Girard shows, with respect to claim #20, a method a substrate processing system to perform: (a) forming a first film on a substrate (paragraph 0150) by supplying a film-forming agent to the substrate (paragraph 0511, 0514); (b) adding oxygen to the first film by supplying a first oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing a part of the first film (paragraph 0151, 0156-0157); and (c) changing the oxygen-added first film into a second film including an oxide film by supplying a second oxidizing agent to the substrate and oxidizing the oxygen-added first film (paragraph 0480, 0505, 0548).
Girard substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #20 above.
Girard fails to explicitly show, with respect to claim #20, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes, by a computer, a substrate processing system.
Ashihara teaches, with respect to claim #20, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes, by a computer, a substrate processing system (paragraph 0072, 0078).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #20, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Ashihara, which teaches, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes, by a computer, a substrate processing system, to incorporate a structural condition that would provide consistent repeatability at minimum cost, as taught by Ashihara.
Girard as modified by Ashihara, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown in the rejection of claim #20 above.
Girard as modified by Ashihara fails to show, with respect to claim #20, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas.
Fukazawa teaches, with respect to claim #20, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas (paragraph 0018, 0022) and a reducing gas (paragraph 0071) an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition (paragraph 0023, 0063, 0069, 0077) wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas (eiii, which is a repetition of ei and eii; paragraph 0067), O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas (paragraph 0018, 0022, 0052), and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas (paragraph 0025, 0065, 0078, 0086).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #20, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by Ashihara, with the modification of Fukazawa invention, which teaches, a method comprising, wherein including an oxidizing gas and a reducing gas an oxidizing power of the first oxidizing agent is lower than an oxidizing power of the second oxidizing agent under a same condition wherein the first oxidizing agent includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas, O- and H-containing gas, O- and N-containing gas and 0- and C-containing gas, wherein the oxidizing gas includes at least one selected from the group of 02 gas and 03 gas, and wherein the reducing gas includes at least one selected from the group of H2 gas and 2H2 gas, to incorporate a structural condition with modify surface properties wherein often used to enhance adhesion and bonding, particularly in microelectronics and other applications where a hydrophilic and well-understood surface chemistry is desirable, as taught by Fukazawa.
Girard as modified by Ashihara and Fukazawa, substantially shows the claimed invention as shown the rejection of claim #20 above.
Girard as modified by Ashihara and Fukazawa, fail to show, with respect to claim #20, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film.
Bernhardt teaches, with respect to claim #20, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film (paragraph 0008-0009, 0016) (repeating process for desired thickness; Paragraph 0027).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, with respect to claim #20, to modified the invention of Girard as modified by the invention of Fukazawa and Ashihara, with the modification of the invention of Bernhardt which teaches, a method wherein the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas are supplied simultaneously to the substrate such the reducing gas reacts with the oxidizing gas to generate oxidizing species that oxidize the oxygen-added first film, to incorporate a process that would provide not only the desired thickness but also tunnelable content, as taught by Bernhardt.
EXAMINATION NOTE
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Pertinent art
Pertinent art, not relied on in the present rejection, but considered to be related to the claimed filed invention, will be listed below.
Hasunuma et al., 6,090,701; implementing the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas either simultaneously or alternately.
Saito et al., 2012/0280369; implementing the oxidizing gas and the reducing gas simultaneously.
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 Andre’ Stevenson whose telephone number is (571) 272 1683 (Email Address, Andre.Stevenson@USPTO.GOV). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Zandra Smith can be reached on 571-272 2429. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Andre’ Stevenson Sr./
Art Unit 2899
06/25/2026
/ZANDRA V SMITH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights