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 .
Status of Claims
This is a final office action for application 17/954,529 in response to the amendment(s) filed on 02/03/2026. Claims 1-5 and 7-17 are under examination. Claims 13-17 remain withdrawn from consideration.
Withdrawn Objections
The amendment(s) to the claim(s), specification, and/or drawing(s) filed 02/03/2026 is acknowledged and the previous objections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 02/03/2026 have been fully considered and do overcome the previous U.S.C. 102 rejection of record, however, the amendments have not overcome the previously applied prior art for the reasons set forth below. See updated claims 1-5 and 7-12 rejections below.
Applicant argues that “Amine fails to suggest or disclose that the active material particles are secondary particles formed by agglomeration of primary particles” (see e.g. page 15 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees that Amine must independently disclose this feature. Aoki already discloses that the lithium transition metal composite oxide is a secondary particle formed by aggregating a plurality of primary particles (see e.g. paragraph [0030] of Aoki). Amine is not relied upon for teaching the secondary particle structure. Amine is relied upon for teaching surface doping/outer coating and a dopant concentration distribution in which the dopant amount is greater at the outer surface/coating region than at an inside/subsurface region. Therefore, applicant’s argument attacks Amine individually rather than the combination of Aoki and Amine as applied in the rejection. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “FIG. 1(c) of Amine only shows a concentration gradient of Ti within the particle and does not specify an inside of the primary particle or a grain boundary of the primary particles” (see e.g. page 15 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed “inside within a surface of each of the primary particles” includes a region beneath the outer surface of the particle. Amine expressly teaches that the concentration profile includes one Ti peak corresponding to a TiO2 outer coating on the surface and another peak at the surface of the particle underneath the TiO2 outer coating, corresponding to doping of Ti into the surface of the lithium transition metal oxide particle (see e.g. paragraph [0053] of Amine). Thus, Amine teaches a dopant present at an outer surface/coating region and also present inside/beneath the surface of the lithium transition metal oxide particle. Further, Aoki supplies the primary particle and grain boundary structure, including Ca/Sr-containing compound present at primary particle boundaries. Therefore, Amine need not separately label the region as a “grain boundary” because Aoki provides the grain-boundary environment and Amine provides the dopant distribution relationship. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Ti in Amine corresponds to the claimed first element and does not correspond to the claimed second element” (see e.g. pages 15-16 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection does not rely on Ti itself as the claimed second element. Aoki teaches Ca and/or Sr as the claimed second element, both being different from nickel and from the first element and having an ionic radius of 80 pm or more. Amine is relied upon for its teaching of a dopant concentration distribution in a lithium transition metal oxide cathode particle, namely a distribution in which more dopant is present at the outer surface/coating region than at the inside/subsurface region. Moreover, Amine is not limited to Ti. Amine expressly teaches that the dopant cation may be selected from a group including Ca, and further teaches metal oxide outer layers including CaO (see e.g. paragraphs [0004], [0007], [0017], [0021], and [0023] of Amine). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood Amine’s surface-doping and outer-coating teachings to be applicable to dopant cations other than Ti, including Ca, especially in view of Aoki’s express use of Ca and Sr compounds in lithium-nickel composite oxide cathode active materials. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “in Amine, Ti does not fully penetrate into the inside of the particle and only forms an outermost coating layer” (see e.g. page 16 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amine expressly teaches two Ti peaks: one corresponding to a TiO2 outer coating on the surface, and another corresponding to doping of Ti into the surface of the lithium transition metal oxide particle underneath the TiO2 outer coating (see e.g. paragraph [0053] of Amine). Thus, Amine does not merely teach an outermost coating layer; Amine also teaches dopant introduction into a region beneath the coating. Further, amended claim 1 does not require that the second element fully penetrate through the entire primary particle or be uniformly distributed throughout the entire interior of the primary particle. The claim requires presence “at an inside within a surface” and a relative amount relationship. Amine teaches a dopant present beneath the outer coating and a greater amount at the outer surface/coating region than in the inside/subsurface region. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “the preparation method of the present specification differs from Amine because the NCM precursor, Li compound, and second element compound are mixed together and heat-treated such that the second element can penetrate into each primary particle as a doping element rather than a coating layer” (see e.g. page 16 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The pending claims are directed to a cathode active material and do not recite the preparation method relied upon by applicant. Limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. Therefore, alleged differences in the preparation method do not patentably distinguish the claimed product unless they result in a structural difference recited in the claims. The structural distribution recited in amended claim 1 is taught or suggested by Aoki in view of Amine for the reasons set forth above. Additionally, Aoki itself teaches mixing a transition metal oxide with a Li compound and at least one of a Ca compound and a Sr compound, followed by calcination, in order to form the positive electrode active material (see e.g. paragraphs [0052]-[0054] of Aoki). Therefore, applicant’s method-based argument is not commensurate with the scope of the pending product claims. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “the claimed distribution of the second element provides advantages, including suppression of cation mixing, stabilization of the crystal/layered structure, action as a barrier to migration of transition metal cations, and increased bonding strength between primary particles” (see e.g. page 12 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims are rejected based on the structural features recited in the claims, and those structural features are taught or suggested by the combined teachings of Aoki and Amine. Aoki teaches that Ca/Sr-containing compound present on surfaces and/or primary particle boundaries inhibits formation and erosion of a structurally deteriorated layer and improves charge/discharge cycle characteristics. Amine likewise teaches that surface doping and an outer coating improve stability and electrochemical performance. Thus, the alleged benefits are consistent with the motivations provided by the prior art and do not establish that the claimed structure would have been nonobvious. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “excessive doping of the second element within the inside of the primary particles may degrade the binder function, and therefore the claimed distribution is adjusted such that the sum of the amount on the outer surface and at the grain boundaries is greater than the amount inside the primary particles” (see e.g. page 13 of applicant’s argument).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amine teaches a dopant distribution in which the dopant amount at the outer surface/coating region is greater than the amount at the inside/subsurface region. Thus, Amine teaches the same general distribution principle relied upon by applicant, namely concentrating more dopant near the surface region than inside the particle. Further, Amine teaches that such surface doping and coating improves electrochemical performance and stability. Therefore, the prior art provides both the claimed distribution relationship and a reason to employ such a distribution. For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
In conclusion, the arguments and amendments filed were not found to be persuasive over the prior art rejection of record. The rejections of the claims have been updated to reflect the amendments where appropriate. See claims 1-5 and 7-12 rejections below.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-5 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (US-2023/0032577-A1) and further in view of Amine et al. (US-2019/0006662-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Aoki discloses a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery (see e.g. “a positive electrode active material for non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries” in paragraph [0001] of Aoki) comprising lithium-nickel composite metal oxide particles (see e.g. “The lithium transition metal composite oxide can be represented by the formula LiaNixMnyMzO2-b” in paragraph [0024] of Aoki and “In the layered structure of the lithium transition metal composite oxide included in the positive electrode active material, a transition metal layer containing Ni and the like, a Li layer, and an oxygen layer are present” in paragraph [0011] of Aoki), each of which has a secondary particle structure in which primary particles are aggregated (see e.g. “The lithium transition metal composite oxide is, for example, a secondary particle formed by aggregating a plurality of primary particles” in paragraph [0030] of Aoki),
wherein the lithium-nickel composite metal oxide particles comprise a first element including at least one element selected from the group consisting of Mn and Co (see e.g. “Li0.99Ni0.82Mn0.03Co0.15Sr0.01Ca0.001O2” in paragraph [0064] of Aoki; Mn and Co correspond to the claimed first element),
and a second element having an ionic radius of 80 pm or more, the second element is different from nickel and the first element (see e.g. Sr and Ca in “Li0.99Ni0.82Mn0.03Co0.15Sr0.01Ca0.001O2” in paragraph [0064] of Aoki; Sr and Ca are different from Ni, Mn, and Co and are also expressly recited in instant claim 2 as examples of the claimed second element),
wherein the second element is present on an outer surface of the secondary particle and at grain boundaries between the primary particles (see e.g. “a compound A including at least one of Ca and Sr present on a surface of a primary particle of the lithium transition metal composite oxide including a surface of a secondary particle thereof, or at a boundary of primary particles” in paragraph [0022] of Aoki and “Compound A is present on a surface or at a boundary of primary particles of the lithium transition metal composite oxide” in paragraph [0031] of Aoki; further see e.g. “Compound A includes at least one of Ca and Sr” in paragraph [0032] of Aoki).
Aoki does not disclose that the second element is present at an inside within a surface of each of the primary particles or that a sum of an amount present on the outer surface and an amount at the grain boundaries between the primary particles is greater than an amount present at the inside within the surface of each of the primary particles based on a total amount of the second element.
Amine, however, in the same field of endeavor, lithium transition metal oxide cathode active materials having surface doping and outer coating for improved battery performance, discloses active cathode materials containing particles with a core containing a lithium transition metal oxide, each core at least partially encapsulated by a layer containing the lithium transition metal oxide and a dopant cation, and an outer layer including metal oxide (see e.g. paragraph [0004] of Amine). Amine further discloses that the dopant cation is selected from the group consisting of Al, Ti, Sn, Mg, Zr, Cu, Fe, Ca, W, Ga, Sc, Y, La, Hf, V, In, Nb, Ta, and any combination of two or more thereof (see e.g. paragraphs [0004], [0007], [0017], and [0021] of Amine). Thus, Amine expressly teaches that Ca, which corresponds to the claimed second element and is also used by Aoki, may be used as a dopant cation.
Amine further discloses a dopant distribution in which the dopant is present at an outer surface/coating region and also at an inside/subsurface region of the lithium transition metal oxide particle, with a greater amount at the outer surface/coating region than at the inside/subsurface region (see e.g. “Two peaks on the concentration profile of Ti were observed, with one corresponding to a TiO2 outer coating on the surface, and the other at the surface of the particle underneath the TiO2 outer coating, corresponding to the doping of Ti into the surface of the lithium transition metal oxide particle” in paragraph [0053] of Amine and FIG. 1(c) of Amine).
As shown in FIG. 1(c) of Amine, the dopant concentration at the outer surface/coating region is greater than the dopant concentration at the inside/subsurface region of the particle. The region underneath the outer coating corresponds to an inside within a surface of the particle under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Further, because Amine teaches that the outer surface/coating-region dopant amount alone is greater than the inside/subsurface dopant amount, the sum of the amount at the outer surface and the amount at the grain boundaries, when applied to Aoki’s secondary particles having primary-particle boundaries, would also be greater than the amount present at the inside within the surface of the primary particles.
Amine further teaches that introducing a dopant cation into a surface layer and providing an outer metal oxide layer improves stability and electrochemical performance of lithium transition metal oxide cathode materials (see e.g. paragraphs [0015], [0054], and [0055] of Amine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Ca/Sr-containing lithium-nickel composite oxide particles of Aoki et al. such that they comprise the surface-doping/outer-coating dopant distribution of Amine et al. in order to improve stability, inhibit surface degradation, and improve electrochemical performance as suggested by Amine. Regarding Claim 2, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the second element includes at least one selected from the group consisting of Ca and Sr (see e.g. "Sr and Ca in " Li0.99Ni0.82Mn0.03Co0.15Sr0.01Ca0.001O2" in paragraph [0064]). Regarding Claim 3, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the lithium-nickel composite metal oxide particles have a chemical structure represented by Li0.91Ni0.85Mn0.05Co0.1Sr0.005O2 (see e.g. Comparative Example 3 in Table 2; Li content was found based on Example 1 (paragraph [0064]), the lithium incorporation efficiency was determined by dividing the measured Li (content of 0.99) by the total Li fed relative to the actual metal content (1.03 × 1.011), giving approximately 95%, applying this same efficiency to the Li fed in Comparative Example 3 (paragraph [0076]), adjusted for its total metals (0.95 × 1.005), gives an estimated incorporated Li of about 0.91, well within the claimed range). In the disclosed chemical structure M1 is represented by Mn and Co and M2 is represented by Sr; x = 0.91, y = 0.85, z = 0.005 and w = 2.
Aoki discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 4, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the chemical structure of the lithium-nickel composite metal oxide is Li0.91Ni0.85Mn0.05Co0.1Sr0.005O2 and thus y = 0.85 (see e.g. Comparative Example 3 in Table 2).
Aoki discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 5, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the chemical structure of the lithium-nickel composite metal oxide is Li0.91Ni0.85Mn0.05Co0.1Sr0.005O2 and thus z = 0.005 (see e.g. Comparative Example 3 in Table 2).
Aoki discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 7, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki discloses that the second element is present at grain boundaries between the primary particles (see e.g. “a compound A including at least one of Ca and Sr present on a surface of a primary particle of the lithium transition metal composite oxide including a surface of a secondary particle thereof, or at a boundary of primary particles” in paragraph [0022] of Aoki and “Compound A is present on a surface or at a boundary of primary particles of the lithium transition metal composite oxide” in paragraph [0031] of Aoki; further see e.g. “Compound A includes at least one of Ca and Sr” in paragraph [0032] of Aoki).
Aoki does not disclose that an amount present at the grain boundaries between the primary particles is greater than an amount present at the inside of the primary particles based on the total amount of the second element.
Amine, however, discloses a dopant distribution in which the dopant is present at an outer surface/coating region and also at an inside/subsurface region of the lithium transition metal oxide particle, with a greater amount at the outer surface/coating region than at the inside/subsurface region (see e.g. “Two peaks on the concentration profile of Ti were observed, with one corresponding to a TiO2 outer coating on the surface, and the other at the surface of the particle underneath the TiO2 outer coating, corresponding to the doping of Ti into the surface of the lithium transition metal oxide particle” in paragraph [0053] of Amine and FIG. 1(c) of Amine).
As shown in FIG. 1(c) of Amine, the dopant concentration at the outer surface/coating region is greater than the dopant concentration at the inside/subsurface region of the particle. Further, Amine discloses that the dopant cation is selected from the group consisting of Al, Ti, Sn, Mg, Zr, Cu, Fe, Ca, W, Ga, Sc, Y, La, Hf, V, In, Nb, Ta, and any combination of two or more thereof (see e.g. paragraphs [0004], [0007], [0017], and [0021] of Amine). Thus, Amine expressly teaches that Ca, which corresponds to the claimed second element and is also used by Aoki, may be used as a dopant cation.
Therefore, when the dopant distribution of Amine is applied to the Ca/Sr-containing lithium-nickel composite oxide particles of Aoki, the second element would be present at the grain boundaries between the primary particles in an amount greater than the amount present at the inside of the primary particles based on the total amount of the second element.
Amine further teaches that introducing a dopant cation into a surface layer and providing an outer metal oxide layer improves stability and electrochemical performance of lithium transition metal oxide cathode materials (see e.g. paragraphs [0015], [0054], and [0055] of Amine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Ca/Sr-containing lithium-nickel composite oxide particles of Aoki et al. such that they comprise the surface-doping/outer-coating dopant distribution of Amine et al. in order to improve stability, inhibit surface degradation, and improve electrochemical performance as suggested by Amine.
Regarding Claim 8, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki discloses Ca and/or Sr as the claimed second element present on surfaces and at boundaries of primary particles of the lithium transition metal composite oxide (see e.g. paragraphs [0022], [0031], and [0032] of Aoki).
Aoki does not disclose that a ratio of the second element present at the inside of the primary particles based on a total weight of the second element is from 5 wt.% to 20 wt.%.
Amine, however, discloses a dopant distribution in which the dopant is present at an outer surface/coating region and also at an inside/subsurface region of the lithium transition metal oxide particle (see e.g. paragraph [0053] and FIG. 1(c) of Amine). Amine further discloses that the dopant cation may be selected from a group including Ca (see e.g. paragraphs [0004], [0007], [0017], and [0021] of Amine). Thus, Amine teaches that the dopant distribution shown in FIG. 1(c) is applicable to dopant cations including Ca, which corresponds to the claimed second element.
As shown in FIG. 1(c) of Amine, the dopant concentration at an inside/subsurface position of the particle is about 10 wt.% Ti, while the dopant concentration at the outer surface/coating region is about 63 wt.% Ti (see e.g. FIG. 1(c) of Amine). The term “inside” is not defined in the instant specification and is therefore given its broadest reasonable interpretation, which includes a region beneath the outer surface of the primary particle. Under this interpretation, Amine teaches a dopant profile in which the dopant is present at an inside/subsurface region beneath the outer coating. Based on the relative dopant amounts shown in FIG. 1(c), the inside/subsurface dopant amount is 10 / (63 + 10) = 13.7 wt.% of the illustrated total dopant amount at the inside/subsurface and outer surface/coating regions.
Amine discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Amine further teaches that introducing a dopant cation into a surface layer and providing an outer metal oxide layer improves stability and electrochemical performance of lithium transition metal oxide cathode materials (see e.g. paragraphs [0015], [0054], and [0055] of Amine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Ca/Sr-containing lithium-nickel composite oxide particles of Aoki et al. such that they comprise the surface-doping/outer-coating dopant distribution of Amine et al. in order to improve stability, inhibit surface degradation, and improve electrochemical performance as suggested by Amine. Regarding Claim 9, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki discloses Ca and/or Sr as the claimed second element present on surfaces and at boundaries of primary particles of the lithium transition metal composite oxide (see e.g. paragraphs [0022], [0031], and [0032] of Aoki).
Aoki does not disclose that a ratio of the second element present at the inside of the primary particles based on a total weight of the second element is from 7 wt.% to 20 wt.%.
Amine, however, discloses a dopant distribution in which the dopant is present at an outer surface/coating region and also at an inside/subsurface region of the lithium transition metal oxide particle (see e.g. paragraph [0053] and FIG. 1(c) of Amine). Amine further discloses that the dopant cation may be selected from a group including Ca (see e.g. paragraphs [0004], [0007], [0017], and [0021] of Amine). Thus, Amine teaches that the dopant distribution shown in FIG. 1(c) is applicable to dopant cations including Ca, which corresponds to the claimed second element.
As shown in FIG. 1(c) of Amine, the dopant concentration at an inside/subsurface position of the particle is about 10 wt.% Ti, while the dopant concentration at the outer surface/coating region is about 63 wt.% Ti (see e.g. FIG. 1(c) of Amine). The term “inside” is not defined in the instant specification and is therefore given its broadest reasonable interpretation, which includes a region beneath the outer surface of the primary particle. Under this interpretation, Amine teaches a dopant profile in which the dopant is present at an inside/subsurface region beneath the outer coating. Based on the relative dopant amounts shown in FIG. 1(c), the inside/subsurface dopant amount is 10 / (63 + 10) = 13.7 wt.% of the illustrated total dopant amount at the inside/subsurface and outer surface/coating regions.
Amine discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Amine further teaches that introducing a dopant cation into a surface layer and providing an outer metal oxide layer improves stability and electrochemical performance of lithium transition metal oxide cathode materials (see e.g. paragraphs [0015], [0054], and [0055] of Amine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Ca/Sr-containing lithium-nickel composite oxide particles of Aoki et al. such that they comprise the surface-doping/outer-coating dopant distribution of Amine et al. in order to improve stability, inhibit surface degradation, and improve electrochemical performance as suggested by Amine.
Regarding Claim 10, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the cathode active material comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of a hydroxide, a carbonate and an oxide containing the second element (see e.g. "Compound A includes at least one of Ca and Sr. Compound A may include a Ca compound or a Sr compound. Ca compounds that, are for example, CaO, Ca(OH)2, and CaCO3 can be exemplified. Sr compounds that are, for example, SrO, Sr(OH)2, and SrCO3 can be exemplified." in paragraph [0032]; CaO and SrO are oxides, Ca(OH)2 and Sr(OH)2 are hydroxides and CaCO3 and SrCO3 are carbonates). Regarding Claim 11, Aoki in view of Amine discloses the cathode active material of claim 10 (see e.g. claim 10 rejection above).
Aoki further discloses that the hydroxide, the carbonate or the oxide containing the second element is present at the grain boundaries between the primary particles (see e.g. "Compound A is present on a surface or at a boundary of primary particles of the lithium transition metal composite oxide." in paragraph [0031] and "Compound A includes at least one of Ca and Sr. Compound A may include a Ca compound or a Sr compound. Ca compounds that, are for example, CaO, Ca(OH)2, and CaCO3 can be exemplified. Sr compounds that are, for example, SrO, Sr(OH)2, and SrCO3 can be exemplified." in paragraph [0032])).
Regarding Claim 12, Aoki in view of Amine discloses a lithium secondary battery (see e.g. "non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery " in paragraph [0007] and FIG. 1 of Aoki), comprising: a cathode (see e.g. "a positive electrode" in paragraph [0007] and part number 11 in FIG. 1 of Aoki) comprising a cathode active material layer (see e.g. "including the positive electrode active material for non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries described above" in paragraph [0007] of Aoki) comprising the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above); and an anode facing the cathode (see e.g. "a negative electrode" in paragraph [0007] and part number 12 in FIG. 1 of Aoki).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 pm 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, TONG GUO can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/J.J.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights