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 .
This application is in response to an amendment filed on 09/16/2025..
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 10-12, 14, 17-18, 20, 22, 24-26 and 49 are presently pending in this application. Applicant has amended claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 17-18, 20, 22, cancelled claims 2, 4, 6-7, 9, 13, 15-16, 19, 21, 23, 27-48, 50-67 and claims 26, 49 are withdrawn as non-elected Group.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dang et al (US PGPUB No.: 2011/0044874 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant).
Regarding claims 1, 5, Dang discloses an oxidation catalyst composition comprising a platinum group metal (i.e., platinum palladium rhodium rhenium osmium ruthenium, paragraph 0021),
an addition of oxides of rare earth element (reads on first oxide being yttrium) added to
a first refractory metal oxide support material comprising of cerium oxide, zirconium oxide, alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, silica-alumina, alumina-zirconia, alumina-titania, silica-titania, silica-zirconia, and titania-zirconia, oxides of one or more compounds of Group IIIB, III and IV where zirconia comprises from about 1-50 wt.% (paragraphs 0010, 0020, 0024-0025) and the concentration of refractory metal oxide support material comprising 10-95 wt.% (paragraph 0030, reads on claim 5).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Dang discloses first oxide (i.e., rare earth metal oxide comprising of yttrium oxide) in amount of 5 wt.% or amount of 10-95 wt.% of refractory oxide can also include this amount of any rare earth metal oxides(paragraphs 0025, 0030).
Regarding claim 11, Dang discloses combination of platinum and palladium (paragraph 0021).
Claims 1, 5, 11, 12, 14, 18, 20, 22, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chiffey et al (US PGPUB No.: 20150202600 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Chiffey discloses an oxidation catalyst composition comprising first washcoat region wherein first washcoat region comprising first platinum group metal (PGM) selected from the group consisting of platinum, palladium and a combination of platinum and palladium (paragraphs 0038-0040, reads on claims 1 and 11 limitation), a NOx storage component comprising oxide of rare earth metal selected from group consisting of lanthanum, yttrium and a combination thereof (i.e., reads on first oxide being oxide of yttrium, paragraph 0038-0040, 0078), a first support material (reads on first refractory metal oxide support material, paragraphs 0039, 0055-0056,0059), and NOx storage component (i.e., first oxide) being supported on the first support material or the refractory metal oxide (paragraph 0082 reads on first oxide being supported on the first refractory metal oxide support material).
Regarding Claim 5, Chiffey discloses a first refractory metal oxide support material comprising oxide of alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, ceria, silica-alumina, titania-alumina, zirconia-alumina, ceria-alumina, titania-silica, zirconia-silica, zirconia-titania, ceria-zirconia and further refractor metal oxide optionally be doped with dopant selected from group consisting of zirconium, titanium, silicon, yttrium lanthanum, praseodymium, samarium, neodymium and oxide thereof (paragraphs 0054-0058). Further, Chiffey discloses when first refractory oxide, for example, ceria-zirconia, then ceria-zirconia may consist of 20 to 95 wt.% of ceria and 5-80 wt.% of zirconia (paragraph 0068, meets limitation of 1-99 wt.% of first refractory metal oxide support material).
Regarding claim 12, Chiffey discloses the ratio of platinum to palladium is from 1:20 to 20:1. (encompasses claimed range of 100 to about 0.01, see paragraphs 0043-0045).
Regarding claims 14, Chiffey discloses the second support material comprising of alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, ceria and a mixed composite oxide thereof such as silica-alumina, titania-alumina, zirconia-alumina, ceria-alumina, titania-silica, zirconia-titania, ceria-zirconia, and alumina-magnesium oxide (paragraphs 0094, 107-0108, reads on clams 14 limitation).
Regarding claim 18, Chiffey discloses second refractory metal oxide support material (i.e. alumina or zirconia, paragraphs 0107-0108) is doped with total amount of 0.25 to 5 wt.% of dopant wherein dopant includes La (paragraph 108-0109).
Regarding claims 20 and 22, Chiffey discloses a NOx storage component comprising oxide of rare earth metal selected from group consisting of lanthanum, yttrium and a combination thereof (i.e., reads on first oxide being oxide of yttrium, paragraph 0038-0040, 0078), a first support material (reads on first refractory metal oxide support material, paragraphs 0039, 0055-0056,0059), and NOx storage component (i.e., first oxide) being supported on the first support material or the refractory metal oxide (paragraph 0082 reads on claim 20 limitation of first oxide being supported on the first refractory metal oxide support material). Further, Chiffey discloses when first refractory oxide, for example, alumina doped with silica where preferably 1-40wt% of alumina present (paragraph 0062, meets limitation of 1-40 wt.% of first refractory metal oxide support material, reads on claim 22 limitation of amount of first refractory metal oxide support material).
In addition, Chiffey further discloses PGM component is supported on the second refractory metal oxide support material (see Chiffey-paragraphs 0094-0095, reads on claim 20 limitation of PGM component supported on second refractory metal oxide support material). Further Chiffey discloses second refractory metal oxide support material present, for example alumina doped with magnesium oxide wherein the alumina is present in an amount of 1-30% by weight (paragraphs 107-109, 111, 114, reads on limitation of 1-40 wt.% of second refractory metal oxide support material of claim 22).
Regarding claim 25, Chiffey does not disclose copper therefore oxidation catalyst composition taught Chiffey is substantially free of copper (see the whole document of Chiffey).
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.
Claims 10, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dang et al (US PGPUB No.: 2011/0044874 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant).
Regarding claim 10, Dang discloses the oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 1 where oxidation catalyst composition comprising of PGM, a first oxide and a first refractory oxide support material but does not explicitly disclose or suggest the palladium loaded on the first refractory oxide support material amount of less than about 10 wt.% based on the weight of the first refractory oxide support, the platinum is loaded on the first refractory metal oxide support in an amount by weight from less than about 10%, based on the weight of the first refractory metal oxide support and wherein at least one of the platinum or the palladium is present in an amount by weight of about 0.1% or greater, based on the weight of the first refractory metal oxide support material.
However, Dang discloses the weight ratio of platinum to palladium is from 1:20 to 20:1 and further discloses concentration of PGM, by weight, from 0.35 g/l to 7.0 g/l (paragraphs 0021, 0030), therefore it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges, which includes the range of 0.1 wt.% or greater or less than10 wt.% of Pt or Pd, through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 12, Dang discloses the ratio of platinum to palladium is from 1:20 to 20:1 (paragraph 0021). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 14, 17-18, 20, 22, 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dang et al (US PGPUB No.: 2011/0044874 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant) in view of Chiffey et al (US PGPUB No.: 20150202600 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant).
Regarding claims 14, 22, Dang discloses the oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 1 where oxidation catalyst composition comprising of PGM component supported on first refractory metal oxide support material and a first oxide comprising of rare earth metal oxide added to the refractory meta oxide in amount of 5 wt.% of rare earth metal oxide or 10-95 wt.% of refractory oxide which can also include this amount of any rare earth metal oxides(paragraphs 0025, 0030, reads on claim 14 and 22-23 limitation) but does not explicitly disclose or suggest further comprising of second refractory oxide support material and wherein the second refractory metal oxide support material optionally comprises alumina, silica, zirconia, titania, ceria, silica-doped alumina, silica-titania, silica-zirconia, yttrium-zirconium, manganese-zirconium, tungsten-titania, zirconia-titania, zirconia-ceria, zirconia-alumina, manganese-alumina, lanthanum-zirconia, lanthanum-zirconia-alumina, magnesium-alumina oxide, or a combination thereof and the second refractory metal oxide support material optionally comprises a base metal oxide chosen from oxides of cerium, iron, cobalt, zinc, chromium, molybdenum, nickel, tungsten, copper, magnesium, antimony, tin, lead, yttrium, and combinations thereof.
However, Chiffey discloses oxidation catalyst for treating an exhaust gas from a diesel engine comprising of first washcoat region comprising first platinum group metal (PGM), a first support material comprising of refractory oxide material, NOx storage component, a second washcoat region comprising of platinum (i.e., reads on PGM component), manganese and a second support material comprising of second refractory metal oxide support material (abstract, paragraphs 0041-0045, 0054-0057, 0078, 0095-0098) where the second support material comprising of alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, ceria and a mixed composite oxide thereof such as silica-alumina, titania-alumina, zirconia-alumina, ceria-alumina, titania-silica, zirconia-titania, ceria-zirconia, and alumina-magnesium oxide (paragraphs 0107-0108, reads on clams 14, 22 limitation).
Given Dang and Chiffey both teach oxidation catalyst for treatment of gaseous emissions, therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to modify the invention of Dang with Chiffey to include the second refractory metal oxide support material of Chiffey which provides excellent activity toward the oxidation of NO in an exhaust gas from diesel engine as taught by Chiffey (paragraph 0007).
Regarding claim 17, Chiffey discloses the oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 14 where oxidation catalyst composition comprising of PGM component (i.e., platinum) supported on a second refractory metal oxide support material in amount from 5 to 300 g/ft3 (paragraph 0098-0099) but does not disclose the platinum (i.e., PGM component) supported on second refractory metal oxide support in an amount by weight from about 0.1% to about 10%, based on the weight of the second refractory metal oxide support material.
However, Chiffey discloses total load of PGM (platinum), by weight, from 5 to 300 g/ft3 and further discloses weight ratio of manganese to platinum of 5:1 to 0.2:1 (paragraphs 0098-0099, 0103-0106), therefore it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges, which includes the range of 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% of Pt (i.e., PGM component), through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 18, Chiffey discloses second refractory metal oxide support material comprises alumina or zirconia (see paragraph 107).
Regarding claim 20, Dang in view of Chiffey discloses first oxide is supported on the first refractory oxide (see Dang- see paragraphs 0010, 0025, 0030) and PGM component is supported on the second refractory metal oxide support material (see Chiffey-paragraphs 0094).
Regarding claim 24, Dang discloses first refractory metal oxide support material comprising of ceria in an amount from 10-95 wt.% (paragraph 0030). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 25, Dang in view of Chiffey does not disclose copper therefore oxidation catalyst composition taught by Dang in view of Chiffey is substantially free of copper (see the whole documents of Dang and Chiffey).
Claims 3, 8, 10, 17 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiffey et al (US PGPUB No.: 20150202600 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant) in view of Dang et al (US PGPUB No.: 2011/0044874 A1, IDS cited reference by applicant).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Chiffey discloses oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 1 and further discloses first oxide (i.e., NOx storage component) being rare earth element (i.e., yttrium oxide) but does not explicitly disclose or suggest first oxide (yttrium) in amount from about 1% by weight to about 90% of claim 3 and upto 99%by weight of claim 8, based on a weight of the first refractory metal oxide support material.
However, Dang discloses an oxidation catalyst composition comprising a platinum group metal (i.e., platinum palladium rhodium rhenium osmium ruthenium, paragraph 0021),
a first refractory metal oxide support material comprising of cerium oxide, zirconium oxide, alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, silica-alumina, alumina-zirconia, alumina-titania, silica-titania, silica-zirconia, and titania-zirconia, oxides of one or more compounds of Group IIIB, III and IV where zirconia comprises from about 1-50 wt.% (paragraph 0024) and the concentration of refractory metal oxide support material comprising 10-95 wt.% (paragraph 0030, reads on claim 5) and
a rare earth metal oxides (i.e. yttrium oxide, paragraph 0020, 0025) added to the refractory oxide material in an amount of 5 wt.%(paragraph 0025) and further discloses that amount of 10-95 wt.% of the refractory metal oxide may include this amount of any rare earth metal oxides as well (paragraph 0030). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Given Chiffey and Dang are both directed to oxidation catalyst for treatment of gaseous emissions, therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to modify the invention of Chiffey with Dang to include the amount of rare earth element (i.e., yttrium oxide) of 5 wt.% or even 10-95wt% of Dang to enhance the stability of the refractory metal oxide as taught by Dang (paragraph 0025).
Regarding claim 10, Chiffey discloses the oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 1 where oxidation catalyst composition comprising of PGM, a first oxide and a first refractory oxide support material but does not explicitly disclose or suggest the palladium loaded on the first refractory oxide support material amount of less than 0 wt.% based on the weight of the first refractory oxide support, the platinum is loaded on the first refractory metal oxide support in an amount by weight from about less than 10%, based on the weight of the first refractory metal oxide support and wherein at least one of the platinum or the palladium is present in an amount by weight of about 0.1% or greater, based on the weight of the first refractory metal oxide support material.
However, Chiffey discloses total load of PGM (platinum), by weight, from 5 to 300 g/ft3 and further discloses weight ratio of platinum to palladium of 20:1 to 1:20 (paragraphs 0043-0045), therefore it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges, which includes the range of 0.1 wt.% or greater or less than 10 wt.% of Pt or Pd, through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 17, Chiffey discloses the oxidation catalyst as disclosed above in claim 14 where oxidation catalyst composition comprising of PGM component (i.e., platinum) supported on a second refractory metal oxide support material in amount from 5 to 300 g/ft3 (paragraph 0098-0099) but does not disclose the platinum (i.e., PGM component) supported on second refractory metal oxide support in an amount by weight from about 0.1% to about 10%, based on the weight of the second refractory metal oxide support material.
However, Chiffey discloses total load of PGM (platinum), by weight, from 5 to 300 g/ft3 and further discloses weight ratio of manganese to platinum of 5:1 to 0.2:1 (paragraphs 0098-0099, 0103-0106), therefore it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of applicant invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges, which includes the range of 0.1 wt.% to 10 wt.% of Pt (i.e., PGM component), through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 24, Chiffey discloses first refractory metal oxide comprising, for example cera-zirconia, in amount from 20 to95 wt.% of ceria and 5-80 wt.% of zirconia (overlaps claimed range of 1-50 wt.%, paragraph 0068). As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant remarks on pages 2-3, filed on 09/16/2025 with respect to the rejections of Claims 1-5, 7-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 over Dang and Claims 14, 17-18, 20, 22-25 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Dang in view of Chiffey have been fully considered and are not persuasive and further maintained. Further examiner has included additional new ground of rejection under 102 over Chiffey (US PGPUB No.: 20150202600, previously cited reference) for claims 1, 5, 11, 12, 14, 18, 20, 22, 25 and rejection under 103 over Chiffey in view of Dang (US PGPUB NO.: 2011/0044874, previously cited reference) for claims 3, 8, 10, 17, 24 as set forth above.
Applicant argues:
“Amended claim 1 recites an oxidation catalyst composition comprising:
a platinum group metal (PGM) component comprising palladium, platinum, or a combination thereof; a first oxide being an oxide of yttrium; and a first refractory metal oxide support material, the first oxide being supported on the first refractory metal oxide support material.
Dang fails to disclose each and every element of claim 1.
Specifically, in the rejection of claim 1, the Office asserted that Dang discloses "a first oxide choses from oxides of silicon and tin in amount from 5 to 50 wt.%."OA, at page 5. However, Dang does not disclose that the first oxide is an oxide of yttrium, let alone that the yttrium is supported on the first refractory metal oxide support material.
Chiffey at best teaches "the NOx storage component comprises an alkali metal, alkaline earth metal and/or a rare earth metal, wherein the rare earth metal is selected from the group consisting of lanthanum, yttrium and a combination thereof." However, Chiffey is completely silent about the yttrium being supported by a first refractory metal oxide, and thus cannot cure the deficiencies of Dang”.
See Remarks, page 2
The examiner respectfully traverses as follow:
Applicant has now amended claim 1 to incorporate first oxide being yttrium and that is still taught by Dang as Dang does discloses rare earth metal oxide such as yttrium oxide can be added to refractory metal oxide support (see paragraphs 0010, 0020, 0024-0025) and therefore rejection utilizing Dang is maintained. Further Chiffey also discloses NOx storage comprising oxide of rare earth metal and can be incorporated first refractory metal oxide support (see paragraphs 0038-0040, 0078 and 0082). Paragraph 0082 of Chiffey reference specially discloses that NOx storage component (i.e., reads on first oxide comprising rare earth metal oxide comprising of yttrium-disposed or supported directly on the first support material or the first refractory metal oxide support, therefore the rejection using Dang in view of Chiffey is maintained.
Applicant argues:
“Regarding the rejection of claim 12, the Office asserts that "Dang discloses the ratio of platinum to palladium is from 1:20 to 20:1."OA, at page 6, last paragraph. The Office cited paragraph [0021] of Dang to support this rejection. However, Applicant respectfully submits that Dang, view in total, or paragraph [0021] alone, doesn't disclose such element.
Specification [0021] of Dang recites
Catalysts that contain only ruthenium and platinum perform better than catalysts which contain only one of the precious metals group. When ruthenium and platinum are used as the platinum group metals, the ratio of the ruthenium to the platinum metal deposited upon the catalyst may be from 20:1 to 1:20, and alternatively from 5:1 to 1:1. The combination of platinum and ruthenium only in the suggested ratios also performs better than combinations of two or more other precious metals, including combinations of ruthenium with a precious metal other than platinum or combinations of platinum with a precious metal other than
ruthenium.
Claim 5 of Dang further recites "The oxidation catalyst of claim 3 wherein the ratio of ruthenium to platinum is 20 to 1 to 1 to 20."
Thus, Dang only disclosed a ratio between ruthenium and platinum and is silent regarding the ratio between platinum to palladium”.
See remarks, page 3.
The examiner respectfully traverses as follow:
Even though the suggested ratio of platinum and ruthenium combination only performs better but does not exclude the ratio of platinum in combination of palladium as disclosed in the same paragraph (0021) that combination of two or more of other precious metals including platinum with a precious metal other than ruthenium can be used with same ratio. Therefore, the same ratio of 20:1 or 1:20 still could apply for combination platinum and palladium which would still encompass the broad range of palladium to platinum in amount from 100-0.01 as presently claimed in claim 12. Therefore the rejection is maintained unless unexpected results are shown otherwise.
Further, amendment to claims overcomes the claim objections of record.
Further, amendment to the claims overcomes the 112(b) rejections of record.
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 SMITA S PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-5837. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM EST M-W.
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).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ching-Yiu Fung can be reached on 5712705713. 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. 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.
/SMITA S PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 12/10/2025
Prosecution Insights