DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 01/02/2026.
3. Claims 1-9, 11-20 are pending. Claims 1-9, 11-19 are under examination on the merits. Claim 1 is amended. Claim 10 is previously cancelled. Claim 20 is withdrawn to a non-elected invention from further consideration.
4. The objections and rejections not addressed below are deemed withdrawn.
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9, 11-19 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-9, 11-15, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Sekine et al. (JP 2010-085568 A machine translation, hereinafter “’568”) in view of Vincent et al. (WO 02/075441 A2, hereinafter “’441”), and Roberts et al. (US Pub. No. 2005/0012079 A1, hereinafter “’079”).
Regarding claim 1: ‘568 teaches an electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), comprising: a solvent (Page 50/131, [0104]-[0105]); a thickening polymer agent (Page 53/131, [0126]), at least an additive (Page 50/131, [0318]-[0322]), and a redox chemical mixture in solution in the solvent, of at least one electrochromic reducing compound (e.g. ferrocene; Page 62/131, [0175]-[0176]), and at least one electrochromic oxidizing compound (e.g. anthraquinone ; Page 62/131, [0175], [0178]), and wherein the electrochromic solution colors in the presence of an applied voltage and bleaches to a colorless condition in the absence of an applied voltage (Page 62/131, [0175]). ‘568 does not expressly teach i) from 1 to 30 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of a thickening polymer agent having a molecular weight of at least 200,000 g/mol, and ii) from 5 to 60 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of an additive having a molecular weight higher than 500 and 50,000 g/mol.
Referring to i), however, ‘441 teaches a display device (Page 17, lines 18-26) comprising an electrochromic composition (Page 1, lines 3-4), wherein the display device comprising at least two electrodes one being anodic and one being cathodic, and positioned between those two electrodes in such a manner to be visible a composition comprising ( a) a non-aqueous compound that undergoes a reversible electron transfer reaction with a subsequent change in its protic state resulting in a pH gradient in the device, (b) at least one indicator dye, and ( c) a charge transport material (Page 3, lines 1-6). ‘441 teaches a preferred embodiment of the method of synthesis of electrochromic composition comprises several steps. The first step is to dissolve an electrochromic ink (preferably the ink comprises ionic components) in a non-aqueous solvent. The next step is adding and mixing a polymer containing nonionic viscosity modifying polymer having a number average molecular weight greater than about 20,000, preferably in the range of about 50,000 to about 100,000 from the group consisting of polyethylene oxide, polyethylene glycol, polypropylene oxide, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinyl acetate, polyacrylamides, poly(vinyl pyrrolidone), polysaccharides, cellulose derivatives, methacrylic polymers, or poly(2-ethyl-2-oxaoline) into the mix. As a third step a low molecular weight polymer having a number average molecular weight from about 200 to about 600 from the same group of polymers as listed in step 2, is then added to the resulting mixture and mixed with it (Page 15, lines 29). Finally, a compound of molecular viscosity average molecular weight from about 300,000 to about 8,000,000 (i.e., read on thickening polymer) again selected from the group of polymers of Step 2 is added and mixed (Page 15, line 30-31 to Page 16 line 1). ‘441 teaches preferred weight percentages are 1 to 30% for the low molecular weight species, 1 to 40% for the intermediate molecular weight species, and 1 to 30% for the high molecular weight species (Page 16, lines 30-32) with benefit of providing lower molecular weight polymer which is added to prevent the gel forming polymer from gelling immediately upon addition to the electrochromic ink. These lower molecular weight materials act as secondary competitive binders. They complex with the available dye, salt, and electroactive species within the system. Thus, through the proper order of addition of speci.es and the proper ratios of the polymers to the complexing species within the system gelation of the electrochromic material is controlled using heat (Page 16, lines 5-11; Page 16, lines 19-23).
Referring to ii), ‘079 teaches an electrochromic medium for use in an electrochromic device (Page 1, [002]) comprising: at least one solvent, an anodic electroactive material, a cathodic electroactive material, wherein at least one of the anodic and cathodic electroactive materials is electrochromic, and a current-reducing additive (Page 1, [0012]), wherein the average molecular weight of the current-reducing additive is greater than approximately 1,000 Daltons, and preferably ranges from approximately 1,000 to approximately 85,000 Daltons, and more preferably ranges from approximately 1,500 to approximately 50,000 Daltons (Page 5, [0047]; Page 5, [0053]). Preferably the concentration of the current-reducing additives range from approximately 5% by weight to approximately 75% by weight, and more preferably from approximately 8% by weight to approximately 30% by weight (Page 6, [0058]) with benefit of providing an electrochromic medium for use in an electrochromic device which includes a current-reducing additive comprising a polymer present in an effective concentration to materially reduce the current of the electrochromic medium upon application of an electrical potential, relative to an electrochromic medium without the current-reducing additive, while maintaining a sufficiently low viscosity to facilitate acceptable production rates without a problematic degree of seal or other device component failure (Page 1, [0002]).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the thicken polymer, and the additive by ‘568, so as to include
from 1 to 30 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of a thickening polymer agent having a molecular weight of at least 200,000 g/mol as taught by ‘441, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing lower molecular weight polymer which is added to prevent the gel forming polymer from gelling immediately upon addition to the electrochromic ink. These lower molecular weight materials act as secondary competitive binders. They complex with the available dye, salt, and electroactive species within the system. Thus, through the proper order of addition of speci.es and the proper ratios of the polymers to the complexing species within the system gelation of the electrochromic material is controlled using heat as suggested by ‘441 (Page 16, lines 5-11; Page 16, lines 19-23).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the thicken polymer, and the additive by ‘568, so as to include
from 5 to 60 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of an additive having a molecular weight higher than 500 and 50,000 g/mol as taught by ‘079, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing an electrochromic medium for use in an electrochromic device which includes a current-reducing additive comprising a polymer present in an effective concentration to materially reduce the current of the electrochromic medium upon application of an electrical potential, relative to an electrochromic medium without the current-reducing additive, while maintaining a sufficiently low viscosity to facilitate acceptable production rates without a problematic degree of seal or other device component failure as suggested by ‘079 (Page 1, [0002]).
Regarding claim 2: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), wherein the solvent is selected from the group consisting of ethylene carbonate, propylene carbonate, γ-butyrolactone, γ-valerolactone, acetronitrile, propionitrile, benzonitrile, glutaronitrile, methyl glutaronitrile, dimethylformamide, N-methylpyrrolidone, sulfolane, 3-methyl sulfolane, methyl propionate, ethylene glycol, ethylene carbonate, propylene glycol diacetate, propylene glycol methyl] ether acetate, ionic liquids, and mixtures thereof (Page 50/131, [0104]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 3: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), wherein the thickening polymer agent is a vinyl acetate polymer (Page 53/131, [0126]).
Regarding claim 4: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]),
wherein the additive is an ester derivative of benzoic acid, or an ester derivative of phthalic acid, or a mixture thereof (Page 50/131, [0104]),
Regarding claim 6: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), wherein the additive is selected from the group consisting of bis (2-ethylhexyl phthalate) (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), dioctyl phthalate (DNOP), diisodecyl phthalate (DIDP), dipropylheptyl phthalate (DPHP), di-2-ethylhexyl terephthalate (DOTP or DEHT) and a mixture thereof (Page 50/131, [0104]).
Regarding claim 8: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), wherein the additive is selected from the group consisting of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), polyvinyl acetate (PVA), polyvinyl butyral (PVB), cellulose acetate butyrate (CAB) and mixture thereof (Page 61/131, [0171]).
Regarding claim 9: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 1, [0012]), wherein the electrochromic solution comprises at least two additives independently selected from the group consisting of ester derivatives of benzoic acid, ester derivatives of phthalic acid (Page 50/131, [0104]), glycol derivatives and low molecular weight polymers (Page 61/131, [0171]).
‘441 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 1, lines 3-4), wherein the electrochromic solution comprises at least two additives independently selected from the group consisting of glycol derivatives and low molecular weight polymers (Page 15, lines 19-31 to Page 16, line 1).
‘079 teaches an electrochromic medium for use in an electrochromic device (Page 1, [002]) comprising a current-reducing additive (Page 1, [0012]), wherein the average molecular weight of the current-reducing additive is greater than approximately 1,000 Daltons, and preferably ranges from approximately 1,000 to approximately 85,000 Daltons, and more preferably ranges from approximately 1,500 to approximately 50,000 Daltons (Page 5, [0047]; Page 5, [0053]).
Regarding claim 11: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 1, [0012]), wherein the thickening polymer agent is a vinyl acetate polymer, and the additive is polypropylene glycol dibenzoate or polyethylene glycol dibenzoate (Page 50/131, [0104]), glycol derivatives and low molecular weight polymers (Page 61/131, [0171]). ‘568 does not expressly teach the thickening polymer agent is from 5 to 15 wt% by weight relative to a total weight of the electrochromic solution and the additive is from 15 to 25 wt% by weight relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution.
However, ‘441 teaches preferred weight percentages are 1 to 30% for the low molecular weight species ( i.e., additive), 1 to 40% for the intermediate molecular weight species, and 1 to 30% for the high molecular weight species (i.e., thickening polymer) (Page 16, lines 30-32) with benefit of providing lower molecular weight polymer which is added to prevent the gel forming polymer from gelling immediately upon addition to the electrochromic ink. These lower molecular weight materials act as secondary competitive binders. They complex with the available dye, salt, and electroactive species within the system. Thus, through the proper order of addition of speci.es and the proper ratios of the polymers to the complexing species within the system gelation of the electrochromic material is controlled using heat (Page 16, lines 5-11; Page 16, lines 19-23).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the amount of thicken polymer, and the additive by ‘568, so as to include from 5 to 15 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of a thickening polymer agent such as a vinyl acetate polymer, and from 15 to 25 wt% relative to the total weight of the electrochromic solution of an additive as taught by ‘441, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing lower molecular weight polymer which is added to prevent the gel forming polymer from gelling immediately upon addition to the electrochromic ink. These lower molecular weight materials act as secondary competitive binders. They complex with the available dye, salt, and electroactive species within the system. Thus, through the proper order of addition of speci.es and the proper ratios of the polymers to the complexing species within the system gelation of the electrochromic material is controlled using heat as suggested by ‘441 (Page 16, lines 5-11; Page 16, lines 19-23).
Alternatively, ‘079 teaches an electrochromic medium for use in an electrochromic device (Page 1, [002]) comprising a current-reducing additive (Page 1, [0012]), wherein the concentration of the current-reducing additives range from approximately 5% by weight to approximately 75% by weight, and more preferably from approximately 8% by weight to approximately 30% by weight (Page 6, [0058]).
Regarding claim 12: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), wherein the at least one electrochromic reducing compound is selected from the group consisting of ferrocene, ethyl ferrocene, t-butyl ferrocene, phenoxazine, N-benzyl phenoxazine, 5,10-dihydrophenazine, N,N,N',N'-tetramethyl-p- phenylenediamine, 10-methyl phenothiazine, isopropylphenothiazine, thioanthrene, and tetrathiafulvalene (Page 46/131, [0175]-[0176]).
Regarding claim 13: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]),
wherein the at least one electrochromic oxidizing compound is selected from the group
consisting of alkylviologens, arylviologens, arylalkylviologens, alkylarylviologens, anthraquinone and derivatives thereof (Page 46/131, [0178]).
Regarding claim 14: ‘568 teaches an electrochromic device (Page 10/131, [0026]) comprising electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]).
Regarding claim 15: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic device (Page 10/131, [0026]), wherein the electrochromic device is selected from the group consisting of optical lenses, optical filters, attenuators, windows, visors, goggles, and displays (Page 8/131,[0008]).
Regarding claim 19: ‘568 teaches the electrochromic solution (Page 44/131, [0066]), further comprising an inert current-carrying electrolyte (Page57/131, [0151]-[0152]).
8. Claims 5,16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Sekine et al. (JP 2010-085568 A machine translation, hereinafter “’568”) in view of Vincent et al. (WO 02/075441 A2, hereinafter “’441”) and Roberts et al. (US Pub. No. 2005/0012079 A1, hereinafter “’079”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Solarski et al. (US Pub. No. 2012/0307338 A1, hereinafter “’338) or Jin Wu (US Pat. No. 10,377,152 B1, hereinafter “’152”).
Regarding claims 5,16: The disclosure of ‘568 in view of ‘’441 and ‘079 is adequately set forth in paragraph 7 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘568 in view of ‘441 and ‘079 does not expressly teach the additive is an ester derivative of benzoic acid of formula (I) or (II) as set forth, wherein the additive is selected from the group consisting of dipropylene glycol dibenzoate (DPGDB), and diethylene glycol dibenzoate (DEGDB).
However. ‘338 teaches an electroactive material, in the form of a self-supported layer, comprising: a matrix, which maintains the mechanical strength of the electroactive material, and an electroactive system, which is inserted in the matrix and comprises an electroactive organic compound (ea1+), an electroactive organic compound (ea2), a solubilization liquid (L), and ionic charges present as ionic salt or acid (Page 1, [0002]-[0006]), wherein the solubilization liquid (L) is dimethylphthalate, polyethylene glycol dibenzonate, or dipropylene glycol dibenzonate (Page 6, [0138], Example 5, Table 5; Page 7, Claim 16-19) with benefit of providing to reduce the haze of the electrochromic glazing units (Page 6, [0138]).
‘152 teaches an ink jet media transport (Col. 1, lines 1-6) comprising optional plasticizers that primarily function to increase the plasticity or fluidity of a material, like the polymer selected for the disclosed media transport member conductive coating mixture, include diethyl phthalate (DEP), dioctyl phthalate, diallyl phthalate, polypropylene glycol dibenzoate, di-2-ethyl hexyl phthalate, diisononyl phthalate, di-2-propyl heptyl phthalate, diisodecyl phthalate, di-2-ethyl hexyl terephthalate, other known suitable plasticizers, mixtures thereof, and the like. The plasticizers, which can be present in various effective amounts, such as for example, from about 0.1 weight percent to about 30 weight percent, from about weight percent to about 20 weight percent, or from about 3 weight percent to about 15 weight percent based on the solids, and providing that the total amount of solids present is equal to about 100 percent (Col. 8, lines 11-26) with benefit of providing in providing to increase the plasticity or fluidity of a material (Col. 8, lines 11-26).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify by the additive by ‘568, so as to include an ester derivative of benzoic acid of formula (I) or (II) as set forth, wherein the additive is selected from the group consisting of dipropylene glycol dibenzoate (DPGDB), and diethylene glycol dibenzoate (DEGDB) as taught by ‘338, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to reduce the haze of the electrochromic glazing units as suggested by ‘338 (Page 6, [0138]).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify by the additive by ‘568, so as to include other the additive such as an ester derivative of benzoic acid of formula (I) or (II) as set forth, wherein the additive is polypropylene glycol dibenzoate present from 15 to 25 wt% by weight relative to the total weight of the solution as taught by ‘152, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to increase the plasticity or fluidity of a material as suggested by ‘’152 (Col. 8, lines 11-26).
9. Claims 7, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Sekine et al. (JP 2010-085568 A machine translation, hereinafter “’568”) in view of Vincent et al. (WO 02/075441 A2, hereinafter “’441”) and Roberts et al. (US Pub. No. 2005/0012079 A1, hereinafter “’079”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kloeppner et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0266460 A1, hereinafter “’460).
Regarding claim 7: The disclosure of ‘568 in view of ‘441 and ‘079 is adequately set forth in paragraph 7 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘079 teaches the current-reducing additive may comprise polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), or a co-polymer of MMA and ethyl acrylate (PMMA/PEA) copolymer (Page 5, [0048]). ‘568 in view of ‘441 and ‘079 does not expressly teach the additive is selected from the group consisting of polyethylene glycol diacrylate (or methacrylate), polyethylene glycol diepoxy, polypropylene glycol diacrylate (or methacrylate), polypropylene glycol diepoxy and mixture thereof.
However, ‘460 teaches an electrochromic device includes a first substrate having a first surface and a second surface, a second substrate having a first surface and a second surface, and a sealing member, joining the second surface of the first substrate to the first surface of the second substrate forming a chamber therebetween, wherein first substrate contains an ultraviolet light absorbing material, the second surface is coated with a first polymer-based electrochromic film comprising an anodic material, and the chamber comprises an fluid medium containing a UV-curable gelling agent. UV-curable gelling agents may include a polyfunctional vinyl compound or an oligomer such as an acrylate, methacrylate, or vinyl ether, such as 1,4-butanediol diacrylate, tris[2-(acryloyloxy)ethyl] isocyanurate, poly(propylene glycol)
diacrylate, poly(propylene glycol) dimethacrylate, poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate, trimethylol propane propoxylate triacrylate and 1,4-butanediol divinyl ether, and combinations thereof, and in addition to the polyfunctional vinyl compounds, monomeric vinyl compounds may also be included into the UV-curable gel to help modify the final properties of the gel (e.g., act as curable medium) (Page 10, [0073]).
In an analogous art of the electrochromic device, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify by the additive by ‘568, so as to include poly(propylene glycol)
diacrylate, poly(propylene glycol) dimethacrylate, poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate as taught by ‘460, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to help modify the final properties of the UV-curable gel (e.g., act as curable medium) as suggested by ‘460 (Page 10, [0073]).
Regarding claims 17-18: The disclosure of ‘568 in view of ‘441 and ‘079 is adequately set forth in paragraph 7 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘568 teaches reducing compound such as azine dyes such as phenazine, phenothiazine, phenoxazine, and acridine (Page 68/131, [0199]; Page 104/131, [0265]). ‘568 in view of ‘441 does not expressly teach reducing compound is 5,10-dihydrophenazine or 10-methylphenothiazine.
However, ‘460 teaches the anodic materials may include, but are not limited to, ferrocenes, ferrocenyl salts, phenazines, phenothiazines, and thianthrenes. Illustrative examples of anodic materials may include di-tert-butyl-diethylferrocene, 5,10-dimethyl-5,10-dihydrophenazine (DMP), 3,7,10-trimethylphenothiazine, 2,3,7,8-tetramethoxy-thianthrene, 10-methylphenothiazine, tetramethylphenazine (TMP), and bis(butyltriethylammonium)-para-methoxytriphenodithiazine (TPDT) (Page 6, [0046]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since the substitution of equivalents (i.e., in view of the art recognized functional equivalence of the two anodic compounds) requires no express motivation as long as the prior art recognizes the equivalency. In re Fount USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); In re Siebentritt, 152 USPQ 618 (CCPA 1967); Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. Inc. v Linde Air Products Co., 85 USPQ 328 (USSC).
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9, 11-19 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Applicant’s argument respect to withdrawn claim 20 in the reply filed on 01/02/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that restriction of claim 20 should be withdrawn
since it would not be unduly burdensome for the examiner to search and examine both groups of claims. This is not found persuasive because the claims are directed to different inventions, and the inventions of claim 20, and claims dependent thereon have acquired a separate status in the art as stated in the restriction requirement of 10/06/2025, and furthermore the invention requires a different field of search, for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries and as such examination of both sets of claims would necessarily be different. Examination and prosecution of two different inventions would in fact pose an undue burden on the examiner.
11. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner Information
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bijan Ahvazi, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 270-3449. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9.00 A.M. -7 P.M..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 571-272-1130. 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.
/Bijan Ahvazi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
01/28/2026
bijan.ahvazi@uspto.gov