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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 3, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed September 29, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1, 9, and 13 have been amended; support for the amendments can be found in cancelled claims 4 and 6 and paragraph [0056] of the Instant Specification. Claims 4 and 6 have been cancelled. Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-14 remain pending and have been examined on their merits in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed September 29, 2025 have been fully considered. Applicant argues that a) upon consideration of the evidence in the application, it can be determined that the outcome would not have been reasonably predictable and there would not have been a reasonable expectation of success at the time of the invention to arrive at the claimed invention because the data in the present application shows that only when the average diameter, amount of lithium iron phosphate and dispersant are within the claimed range as Ahn and Han teach overlapping ranges of the amount of dispersant and the average particle diameter.
Regarding argument A, Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but are considered moot in view of the new grounds of rejection below in view of Applicant’s amendments to the independent claims because Zhao teaches s cathode material comprises lithium iron phosphate (“a positive electrode active material”), a conductive agent (“a conductive material”), a binder (“a binder”), and a dispersant (“a dispersant”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]) with a solvent, wherein the amount of the lithium iron phosphate and dispersant closely overlaps with the Applicant’s claimed ranges of the parts by weight of the lithium iron phosphate and dispersant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-9, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 108091847 A) in view of Ahn et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200044238 A1), hereinafter referred to as Zhao and Ahn.
Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a cathode material (“a positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0002]). Zhao teaches the cathode material comprises lithium iron phosphate (“a positive electrode active material”), a conductive agent (“a conductive material”), a binder (“a binder”), and a dispersant (“a dispersant”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the mixing of lithium iron phosphate, a conductive agent, a binder, and a dispersant includes a solvent (“a solvent”) (see e.g., paragraphs [0024]-[0025]). Zhao teaches the dispersant is included 0.3-0.4% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“the dispersant is included in an amount of 0.2 parts by weight to 0.9 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate is included 92.85-95.35% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“wherein the lithium iron phosphate is included in an amount of 94.8 parts by weight to 98.0 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate has a particle size D50 of greater than 1.1 µm (“wherein the positive electrode active material includes lithium iron phosphate, the lithium iron phosphate has an average particle diameter D50 of from 1.5 µm or to 4.5 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0048]), specifically, Zhao teaches embodiments in which the particle size D50 is 1.58 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0075] and Example 5) and 1.8 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0082] and Example 7).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the weight percentages of the dispersant and the lithium iron phosphate overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Zhao does not explicitly teach wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber.
However, Ahn teaches a slurry for a secondary battery positive electrode which includes forming a first mixture in a paste state by adding a lithium iron phosphate-based positive electrode active material, a conductive agent, a binder, and a solvent, and preparing a slurry for a positive electrode by mixing while further adding a solvent to the first mixture in the paste state (see e.g., Abstract). Ahn teaches the dispersant is a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) (“wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber”) (see e.g., paragraph [0029]). Ahn teaches the hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the dispersant of Zhao to be a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR), as taught by Ahn, in order to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Regarding claim 3, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao, as modified by Ahn, does not explicitly teach wherein the lithium iron phosphate is a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: Li1+aFe1-xMx(PO4-b)Xb.
However, Ahn teaches lithium iron phosphate-based positive electrode active material may be represented by the following Formula: Li1+aFe1-xMxPO4-bAb, wherein M is at least one selected from the group consisting of manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), scandium (Sc), titanium (Ti), chromium (Cr), vanadium (V), and zinc (Zn), A is at least one selected from the group consisting of sulfur (S), selenium (Se), fluorine (F), chlorine (Cl), and iodine (I), −0.5<a<0.5, 0≤x<0.5, and 0≤b≤0.1 (“wherein the lithium iron phosphate is a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: Li1+aFe1-xMx(PO4-b)Xb”) (see e.g., paragraph [0022]-[0023]) in order to have a structurally very stable positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0017]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the lithium iron phosphate of Zhao, as modified by Ahn, to be represented by the following Formula: Li1+aFe1-xMxPO4-bAb, as taught by Ahn, in order to have a structurally very stable positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 5, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao teaches the dispersant is included 0.3-0.4% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“the dispersant is included in an amount of 0.2 parts by weight to 0.7 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the weight percentages of the dispersant overlap with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 7, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao teaches the binder is included 2-4% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“wherein the binder is included in an amount of 1 part by weight to 4 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 8, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao teaches the solid content of the mixed solution is 52%-57% (“wherein a solid content of the positive electrode slurry composition is 40 wt% to 75 wt%”) (see e.g., paragraph [0031).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because solid content of the mixed solution overlap with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 9, Zhao teaches a cathode material for a cathode for a lithium-ion battery (“a positive electrode active material layer”) (see e.g., paragraph [0002]). Zhao teaches the cathode comprises lithium iron phosphate (“a positive electrode active material”), a conductive agent (“a conductive material”), a binder (“a binder”), and a dispersant (“a dispersant”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the mixing of lithium iron phosphate, a conductive agent, a binder, and a dispersant includes a solvent (“a solvent”) (see e.g., paragraphs [0024]-[0025]). Zhao teaches the dispersant is included 0.3-0.4% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“the dispersant is included in an amount of 0.2 parts by weight to 0.9 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate is included 92.85-95.35% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“wherein the lithium iron phosphate is included in an amount of 94.8 parts by weight to 98.0 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate has a particle size D50 of greater than 1.1 µm (“wherein the positive electrode active material includes lithium iron phosphate, the lithium iron phosphate has an average particle diameter D50 of from 1.5 µm or to 4.5 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0048]), specifically, Zhao teaches embodiments in which the particle size D50 is 1.58 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0075] and Example 5) and 1.8 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0082] and Example 7).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the weight percentages of the dispersant and the lithium iron phosphate overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Zhao does not explicitly teach the positive electrode active material layer positioned on at least one surface of the positive electrode current collector and wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber.
However, Ahn teaches a positive electrode (“a positive electrode”) (see e.g., paragraph [0074]) comprising the positive electrode slurries coated on current collectors (“a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material layer positioned on at least one surface of the positive electrode current collector”) (see e.g., paragraph [0073]). Ahn teaches the slurry comprises a lithium iron-phosphate-based positive electrode active material, a conductive agent, a binder, a dispersant (see e.g., paragraph [0029]), and a solvent (see e.g., paragraph [0016]). Ahn teaches the dispersant is a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) (“wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber”) (see e.g., paragraph [0029]). Ahn teaches the hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the dispersant of Zhao to be a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR), as taught by Ahn, in order to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Regarding claim 12, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
As previously described in claim 9, Ahn teaches a positive electrode (see e.g., paragraph [0074]) comprising the positive electrode slurries coated on current collectors (“wherein the positive electrode active material layer directly contacts the positive electrode current collector”) (see e.g., paragraph [0073]).
Regarding claim 13, Zhao teaches a cathode material for a cathode for a lithium-ion battery (“a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode”) (see e.g., paragraph [0002]). Zhao teaches a negative electrode and electrolyte (“a negative electrode” and “an electrolyte”) (see e.g., paragraph [0097]). Zhao teaches the cathode comprises lithium iron phosphate (“a positive electrode active material”), a conductive agent (“a conductive material”), a binder (“a binder”), and a dispersant (“a dispersant”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the mixing of lithium iron phosphate, a conductive agent, a binder, and a dispersant includes a solvent (“a solvent”) (see e.g., paragraphs [0024]-[0025]). Zhao teaches the dispersant is included 0.3-0.4% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“the dispersant is included in an amount of 0.2 parts by weight to 0.9 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate is included 92.85-95.35% in the cathode material by weight percentage (“wherein the lithium iron phosphate is included in an amount of 94.8 parts by weight to 98.0 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of solids in the positive electrode slurry composition”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Zhao teaches the lithium iron phosphate has a particle size D50 of greater than 1.1 µm (“wherein the positive electrode active material includes lithium iron phosphate, the lithium iron phosphate has an average particle diameter D50 of from 1.5 µm or to 4.5 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0048]), specifically, Zhao teaches embodiments in which the particle size D50 is 1.58 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0075] and Example 5) and 1.8 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0082] and Example 7).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the weight percentages of the dispersant and the lithium iron phosphate overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Zhao does not explicitly teach a separator and wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber.
However, Ahn teaches a lithium secondary battery that includes a positive electrode, a negative electrode disposed to face the positive electrode, a separator disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and an electrolyte, wherein the positive electrode (“a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a separator, and an electrolyte”) (see e.g., paragraph [0046]). Ahn teaches the slurry comprises a lithium iron-phosphate-based positive electrode active material, a conductive agent, a binder, a dispersant (see e.g., paragraph [0029]), and a solvent (see e.g., paragraph [0016]). Ahn teaches the dispersant is a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) (“wherein the dispersant includes a hydrogenated nitrile-based butadiene rubber”) (see e.g., paragraph [0029]). Ahn teaches the hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR) to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the dispersant of Zhao to be a hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber (HNBR), as taught by Ahn, in order to improve dispersibility by not reducing the adhesion to a surface of a carbon coating coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Regarding claim 14, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao teaches the preparation method includes first dissolving conductive carbon black and conductive slurry in a binder liquid, stirring for 25-35 minutes, then adding lithium iron phosphate and adjusting the solid content of the mixed solution to 52%-57% by adding a first solvent, continuing to stir for 3.5-4.5 hours (“stirring and mixing the positive electrode slurry composition of claim 1”, and then degassing under slow stirring for 25-35 minutes to obtain a lithium-ion battery positive electrode slurry, which is then dried to obtain a lithium-ion battery positive electrode material (see e.g., paragraph [0056]).
Zhao, as modified by Ahn, does not explicitly teach applying the positive electrode slurry composition onto a positive electrode current collector, followed by drying and rolling.
However, Ahn teaches the slurry composition for a positive electrode is coated on the positive electrode collector, and the positive electrode may then be prepared by drying and rolling the coated positive electrode collector (“applying the positive electrode slurry composition onto a positive electrode current collector, followed by drying and rolling”) (see e.g., paragraph [0043]) to have a positive electrode uniformly coated without the formation of grains on the surface thereof (see e.g., paragraph [0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify preparation of the cathode of Zhao to coat the slurry composition for the positive electrode on the positive electrode and then dried and rolled, as taught by Ahn, in order to have a positive electrode uniformly coated without the formation of grains on the surface thereof (see e.g., paragraph [0010]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 108091847 A) in view of Ahn et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200044238 A1), and further in view of Han et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 2016/0087261 A1), hereinafter referred to as Han.
Regarding claim 2, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Zhao, as modified by Ahn, does not explicitly teach wherein the lithium iron phosphate is in a form of a secondary particle having a plurality of primary lithium iron phosphate particles.
However, Han teaches a positive electrode for a rechargeable lithium battery (see e.g., Abstract). Han teaches the positive active material includes a lithium metal compound including primary particles and secondary particles including agglomerations of the primary particles (see e.g., paragraph [0006]), wherein the lithium metal compound may be represented by LiFEPO4 (“wherein the lithium iron phosphate is in a form of a secondary particle having a plurality of primary lithium iron phosphate particles”) (see e.g., paragraph [0011]). Han teaches the primary and secondary particles provide an excellent current flow and improved high-rate charge and discharge characteristics and cycle-life characteristics of a rechargeable lithium battery (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the lithium iron phosphate of Zhao, as modified by Han, to include primary particles and secondary particles including agglomerations of the primary particles, as taught by Han, in order to provide an excellent current flow and improved high-rate charge and discharge characteristics and cycle-life characteristics of a rechargeable lithium battery (see e.g., paragraph [0035]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 108091847 A) in view of Ahn et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200044238 A1), and further in view of Cheng et al. (CN 111540877 A), hereinafter referred to as Cheng.
Regarding claim 10, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Zhao, as modified by Ahn, does not explicitly teach wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode adhesion of 32 gf/20 mm or more as measured by a 90° peel test.
However, Cheng teaches an electrode that includes a conductive substrate, a first material layer and a second material layer, wherein the first material layer is arranged on the surface of the conductive substrate, and the second material layer is arranged on the side surface of the first material layer away from the conductive substrate, and the compaction density of the second material layer is greater than the compaction density of the first material layer (see e.g., paragraph [0008]). Cheng teaches the electrode has an adhesion of 77.1, 76.6, 77, 53, and 56 gf/20 mm (“wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode adhesion of 32 gf/20 mm or more as measured by a 90° peel test”) (see e.g., Tables 1 and 2). Cheng teaches the higher peel strength leads to better surface pore size distribution, better electrolyte infiltration effect, and higher structural stability (see e.g., paragraph [0118]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the positive electrode of Zhao, as modified by Ahn, to have a positive electrode adhesion of 77.1, 76.6, 77, 53, and 56, gf/20 mm, as taught by Cheng, in order to have better surface pore size distribution, better electrolyte infiltration effect, and higher structural stability (see e.g., paragraph [0118]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 108091847 A) in view of Ahn et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200044238 A1), and further in view of Kang et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 2021/0249650 A1), hereinafter referred to as Kang.
Regarding claim 11, Zhao, as modified by Ahn, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Zhao, as modified by Ahn, does not explicitly teach wherein the positive electrode has a resistance value per unit area in a thickness direction of the positive electrode of 9 Ω·cm2 or less.
However, Kang teaches a secondary battery (see e.g., paragraph [0004]). Kang teaches the secondary battery comprises a positive active material that includes lithium iron phosphate (LFP) (see e.g., paragraph [0035]). Kang teaches the resistance per unit area of the positive electrode sheet is 0.1, 0.02, 0.5, 0.8, 0.6, 0.7, 1.1, and 1.2 Ω·cm2 (“wherein the positive electrode has a resistance value per unit area in a thickness direction of the positive electrode of 9 Ω·cm2 or less”) (see e.g., Table 1). Kang teaches the values of the resistance per unit area of the positive electrode sheet improve the dynamics performance and cycle performance of the battery (see e.g., paragraph [0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the positive electrode of Zhao, as modified by Ahn, to have the resistance per unit area be 0.1, 0.02, 0.5, 0.8, 0.6, 0.7, 1.1, and 1.2 Ω·cm2, as taught by Kang, in order to improve the dynamics performance and cycle performance of the battery (see e.g., paragraph [0032]).
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 Katherine N Higgins whose telephone number is (703)756-1196. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays - Thursdays 7:30-4:30 EST, Fridays 7:30 - 11:30 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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/KATHERINE N HIGGINS/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728