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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 28 April 2026 has been entered.
Applicant’s amendments to the Abstract have overcome the Specification objection. The Specification objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have voided interpretation invoked under 35 USC 112(f). As a result, the Claim Interpretation section has been removed in the present Office action.
Applicant’s amendments and arguments (the examiner was persuaded by the argument on pages 12-13 in the arguments filed 28 April 2026 regarding the “repair area,” the “zero-stiffness load,” and the “critical damage load”) have overcome the 35 USC 112 rejections. Accordingly, the 35 USC 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 28 April 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, after conducting an updated search, an additional reference was identified, which teaches the amended portion of the claims. Therefore, the grounds of rejection under 35 USC § 103 still stand.
Status of the Claims
In the amendment dated 28 April 2026, the status of the claims is as follows: Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-12, and 14 have been amended. Claim 9 has been cancelled.
Claims 1-8 and 10-15 are pending. Claims 5, 13, and 15 have been withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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 1-2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (KR-101953645-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure) in view of Jeung et al. (US-20180204973-A1) and Kim et al. (WO-2019107960-A1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure; hereinafter Kim ‘960).
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches an apparatus (fig. 1b) for repairing elements (“Apparatus and method for repairing led substrate,” title), comprising:
a bonding material transfer stamp (bonding material dispenser 350, fig. 4b; a stamp is not disclosed) configured to transfer a new bonding material (new conductive bonding material 57, fig. 4b) to a repair area (defect occurrence area DA, fig. 4b) on a substrate (substrate 50, fig. 4b), the repair area being an area from which a defective element (defect LED 54, fig. 3c) or a residual bonding material has been removed (remaining conductive bonding material 56, fig. 3d); and
an element transfer stamp (LED seating part 460, fig. 5c; a “stamp” is not disclosed) configured to transfer a new element (new LED 60, fig. 5c) to the new bonding material.
Han, figs. 4b and 5c
PNG
media_image1.png
422
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
318
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Han does not explicitly disclose a bonding material transfer stamp; an element transfer stamp, wherein the element transfer stamp comprises a load control portion for elements, the load control portion comprising a base, a pillar connected at one end thereof to one surface of the base, and a plate adjoining another end of the pillar, the load control portion being configured to be bent and deformed upon receiving pressing force by buckling of the pillar such that a zero- stiffness load smaller than a critical damage load of the new element is applied to the new element, wherein the zero-stiffness load remains at a constant level over a displacement range from a first displacement to a second displacement of the pillar.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Jeung teaches wherein the element transfer stamp comprises a load control portion (transfer assembly 10, fig. 1; “PDMS,” para 0062; construed as silicon rubber) for elements, the load control portion comprising a base (body unit 11, fig. 8), a pillar (ciliary unit body 12a, fig. 8) connected at one end thereof (bottom end of 12a, fig. 8) to one surface of the base (top surface of body unit 11, fig. 8), and a plate (adsorption unit 12b, fig. 8; fig. 2a for the units 12b is construed as being a plate shape) adjoining another end of the pillar (top end of 12a, fig. 1), the load control portion being configured to be bent and deformed upon receiving pressing force by buckling of the pillar (the body 12a of ciliary units 12 buckle or bend when an electrode 140 presses against the units 12, fig. 16; “the ciliary units 12 are bent or contracted,” para 0121) such that a zero-stiffness load (“come into contact…adhesive strength” para 0121; “PDMS,” para 0062; construed such that a zero=stiffness load is applied when the LED structures 100 adhere to the ciliary units 12, and that the applied load is zero-stiffness because the units 12 are made out of PDMS, fig. 16) smaller than a critical damage load of the new element is applied to the new element (“without damaging the LED structures 100,” para 0121), wherein the zero-stiffness load remains (“adhesive strength may be uniformly maintained,” para 0121) over a displacement range from a first displacement to a second displacement of the pillar (annotated in fig. 16 below; construed such that the adhesive force is maintained in both displacement positions).
Jeung, fig. 16
PNG
media_image3.png
650
924
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Jeung, by using the transfer assembly 10, as taught by Jeung, on the bottom of the LED seating part 460, as taught by Han, in order to use a transfer assembly that includes ciliary units having elasticity to prevent damage to the LED structures, because micro LED structures are very thin and can be easily damaged, which leads to a reduction in their reliability (Jeung, paras 0014 and 0121).
Han/ Jeung do not explicitly disclose a bonding material transfer stamp; an element transfer stamp, wherein the zero-stiffness load remains at a constant level.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Kim ‘960 teaches a bonding material transfer stamp (fig. 3; “plate-type transfer device,” page 6; construed as a stamp); an element transfer stamp (fig. 3; “plate-type transfer device,” page 6; construed as a stamp), wherein the zero-stiffness load (force “F,” fig. 9; load control layer 220, fig. 9; “PDMS,” page 11; “breakage of the micro element 50 can be prevented,” page 12) remains at a constant level (level S1, fig. 6; the stress is constant between displacement E1 and displacement E2).
Kim ‘960, figs. 3 and 6
PNG
media_image4.png
660
864
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
644
672
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han/Jeung, in view of the teachings of Kim ‘960, by using plate-type transfer devices, as taught by Kim ‘960, for the dispenser 350 and seating part 460, as taught by Han, and where the PDMS ciliary units contract between different positions, as taught by Jeung in fig. 16, such that a zero stiffness region is maintained between these positions, as taught by Kim ‘960, in order to use a flexible plate-type stamp transfer device, which is widely used, and because a load control layer of PDMS deforms within a certain strain section, for the advantage of ensuring that the micro element is not damaged while still uniformly applying the appropriate contact pressure to the microdevice necessary for the transfer process, even in the event that there is a load control error in the pressing force applied to the micro element by the transfer device (Kim ‘960, pages 6, 8, and 10).
Regarding claim 2, Han teaches, further comprising: a removal stamp (removal module 260, figs. 3c-3d; a stamp is not disclosed) configured to remove the defective element (LED 54, fig. 3c) on the substrate or the residual bonding material (material 56, fig. 3d) remaining after removal of the defective element.
Han does not explicitly disclose a removal stamp.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Kim ‘960 teaches a removal stamp (fig. 3; “plate-type transfer device,” page 6; construed as a stamp).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Kim ‘960, by using a plate-type transfer device, as taught by Kim ‘960, for the removal module 260, as taught by Han, in order to use a flexible plate-type stamp transfer device, which is widely used in the art (Kim ‘960, pages 6 and 10; module 260 moves up and down and bonds with the devices similar to a stamp, page 12 and figs. 3c-d).
Regarding claim 8, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the removal stamp further comprises: a load control portion for removal, the load control portion configured to be bent and deformed upon receiving pressing force such that a zero-stiffness load smaller than a critical damage load of the defective element is applied to the defective element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Jeung teaches wherein the removal stamp further comprises: a load control portion (transfer assembly 10, fig. 16) for removal (LED structures 100 are removed or transferred from the temporary substrate 200 to the transfer assembly 10, para 0124; fig. 15), the load control portion configured to be bent and deformed upon receiving pressing force (para 0121; fig. 16) such that a zero-stiffness load (“come into contact…adhesive strength” para 0121; “PDMS,” para 0062; construed such that a zero=stiffness load is applied when the LED structures 100 adhere to the ciliary units 12, and that the applied load is zero-stiffness because the units 12 are made out of PDMS, fig. 16) smaller than a critical damage load of the defective element is applied to the defective element (“without damaging the LED structures 100,” para 0121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Jeung, by using the transfer assembly 10, as taught by Jeung, on the bottom of the removal module 260, as taught by Han, in order to use a transfer assembly that includes ciliary units having elasticity to prevent damage to the LED structures, because micro LED structures are very thin and can be easily damaged, which leads to a reduction in their reliability (Jeung, paras 0014 and 0121).
Claims 3-4, 6, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (KR-101953645-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure) in view of Jeung et al. (US-20180204973-A1) and Kim et al. (WO-2019107960-A1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure; hereinafter Kim ‘960) as applied to claims 1-2 above and further in view of Shindo et al. (JP-2006172166-A, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure).
Regarding claim 3, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the removal stamp comprises: multiple pads configured to contact the defective element, one of the multiple pads being selected to be adhesively attached to the defective element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Shindo teaches wherein the removal stamp (fig. 1) comprises: multiple pads (“a,” fig. 5a construed as multiple pads that located on the tape 5’, fig. 1) configured to contact the defective element (IC chip 1, fig. 6), one of the multiple pads being selected to be adhesively attached to the defective element (ACF is an adhesive; “IC chip 1 sufficiently adhere to the ACF 101,” page 8).
Shindo, fig. 6
PNG
media_image6.png
728
806
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Shindo, by using the second embodiment of fig. 1 that uses an ACF sheet to join an IC chip to a tape, as taught by Shindo, as the removal module 260, as taught by Han, where instead of a plate-type transfer device, as taught by Kim ‘960, an upper pusher 30’ was used with a ceramic heater, as taught by Shindo, in order to use a continuous tape that is used to pick up the defective LED devices and residual materials that are bonded using thermocompression ACF bonding, for the advantage of automating and facilitating the removal of the defective LEDs as a result of using the tape in comparison to removing the defective LEDs one at a time, which requires more manual labor and is much slower (Shindo, page 2).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Han in view of Kim ‘960, Jeung, and Shindo as set forth above regarding claim 3 teaches the invention of claim 4. Specifically, Shindo teaches wherein the removal stamp (fig. 1) further comprises: a tape (tape 5’, fig. 5a) having a lower surface (bottom of tape 5’, fig. 6) to which the multiple pads are attached in a row (as shown in fig. 5a; the tape 5 is also shown in fig. 1), the tape configured to be fed by a pair of rollers (reels 51 and 52, fig. 1) spaced apart from each other and connected to the tape (tape 5, fig. 1); and a pressing head (upper pusher 30’, fig. 6) disposed on an upper surface of the tape (upper surface of tape 5’, fig. 6) configured to be vertically movable (“z-axis direction,” page 6) and configured to press the tape downward to press one of the multiple pads (ACF sheet 101, fig. 6; ACF sheet 101 is located with “a,” fig. 5a) against the defective element (IC chip 1, fig. 6).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Han in view of Kim ‘960, Jeung, and Shindo as set forth above regarding claim 3 teaches the invention of claim 6. Specifically, Shindo teaches wherein the pad (“a,” fig. 5a) comprises: a receiving groove (recess 7, fig. 5a) formed on a lower surface of the pad to receive the defective element (IC chip 1, fig. 5b) therein; a heater (“ceramic heater,” page 8; the heater is located inside the upper pusher 30’, fig. 6; the upper pusher 30’ is construed as being part of the claimed “pad”) disposed around the receiving groove (upper heater 30’ is disposed around the ACF sheet 101 in order to provide “thermocompression,” page 8; construed such that the heater is around the ACF sheet 101; ACF sheet 101 is aligned with the recess 7, figs. 5a-b); and an adhesive layer (ACF sheet 101, fig. 6; “sufficiently adhere,” page 8) disposed in the receiving groove (recess 7, fig. 5a) and configured to be heated by the heater (“thermocompression bonding,” page 8) to allow the defective element received in the receiving groove to be adhesively attached to the adhesive layer (“sufficiently adhere,” page 8; figs. 5a-b).
Regarding claim 12, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the bonding material transfer stamp comprises: a tape having a lower surface to which multiple new bonding materials are attached in a row, the tape configured to be fed by a pair of rollers spaced apart from each other and connected to the tape; and a pressing head disposed on an upper surface of the tape configured to be vertically movable and configured to press the tape downward to press one of the multiple new bonding materials against the repair area.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Shindo teaches wherein the bonding material transfer stamp (fig. 1) further comprises: a tape (tape 5, fig. 4) having a lower surface to which multiple new bonding materials (adhesive 9, fig. 4; fig. 2 shows multiple adhesives 9) are attached in a row (fig. 2), the tape configured to be fed by a pair of rollers (reels 51 and 52, fig. 1) spaced apart from each other and connected to the tape (tape 5, fig. 1); and a pressing head (upper pusher 30, fig. 4) disposed on an upper surface of the tape (upper surface of tape 5, fig. 4) configured to be vertically movable (“z-axis direction,” page 6) and configured to press the tape downward to press one of the multiple new bonding materials against the repair area (adhesive 9 is pressed against the area below IC chip 1, fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Shindo, by using the first embodiment of fig. 1 that uses an adhesive 9 join an IC chip from a tape to a bottom substrate, as taught by Shindo, as the bonding material dispenser 350, as taught by Han, where instead of a plate-type transfer device, as taught by Kim ‘960, an upper pusher 30 was used, as taught by Shindo, in order to use a continuous tape that is used to deliver new replacement LED devices, for the advantage of automating and facilitating the delivery of replacement LEDs as a result of using the tape in comparison to removing the defective LEDs one at a time, which requires more manual labor and is much slower (Shindo, page 2).
Regarding claim 14, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the element transfer stamp further comprises: a tape having a lower surface to which multiple new elements including the new element are attached in a row, the tape configured to be fed by a pair of rollers spaced apart from each other and connected to the tape; and a pressing head disposed on an upper surface of the tape configured to be vertically movable and configured to press the tape downward to press one of the multiple new elements against the new bonding material.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Shindo teaches wherein the bonding material transfer stamp (fig. 1) further comprises: a tape (tape 5, fig. 4) having a lower surface to which multiple new elements (IC chip 1, fig. 4; fig. 1 shows multiple IC chips 1) including the new element (the IC chip 1 in fig. 4 is construed as the claimed “new element”) are attached in a row (fig. 1), the tape configured to be fed by a pair of rollers (reels 51 and 52, fig. 1) spaced apart from each other and connected to the tape (tape 5, fig. 1); and a pressing head (upper pusher 30, fig. 4) disposed on an upper surface of the tape (upper surface of tape 5, fig. 4) configured to be vertically movable (“z-axis direction,” page 6) and configured to press the tape downward to press one of the multiple new elements (IC chip 1, fig. 4) against the bonding material (adhesive 9, fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Shindo, by using the first embodiment of fig. 1 that uses an adhesive 9 join an IC chip from a tape to a bottom substrate, as taught by Shindo, as the LED seating part 460, as taught by Han, where instead of a plate-type transfer device, as taught by Kim ‘960, an upper pusher 30 was used, as taught by Shindo, in order to use a continuous tape that is used to deliver new replacement LED devices, for the advantage of automating and facilitating the delivery of replacement LEDs as a result of using the tape in comparison to removing the defective LEDs one at a time, which requires more manual labor and is much slower (Shindo, page 2).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (KR-101953645-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure) in view of Jeung et al. (US-20180204973-A1) and Kim et al. (WO-2019107960-A1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure; hereinafter Kim ‘960) and Shindo et al. (JP-2006172166-A, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure) as applied to claims 1-3 and 6 above and further in view of Ayotte et al. (US-20170312841-A1).
Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the heater is an induction heater configured to inductively heat a bonding material electrically connecting the defective element to the substrate.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Ayotte teaches wherein the heater is an induction heater (induction heater 48, fig. 1) configured to inductively heat a bonding material (solder bump 50, fig. 3) electrically connecting the defective element to the substrate (the solder is used to electrically connect the chip 12 to the substrate 14, fig. 3).
Ayotte, fig. 1
PNG
media_image7.png
991
1047
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Ayotte, by using an induction heater, as taught by Ayotte, instead of a ceramic heater, as taught by Han, and a heating part 250, as taught by Han, and by melting the bonding material, as taught by Ayotte, under the defective LED during its removal, as taught by Han in figs. 3b-c, because this amounts to a simple substitution of one heater known in the art for another with predictable results (the change of using a heater that is specifically an induction heater, as taught by Ayotte, instead of ceramic heater, as taught by Shindo, or a generic heating part, as taught by Han, will not change the operation of the heater as it provides heating).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (KR-101953645-B1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure) in view of Jeung et al. (US-20180204973-A1) and Kim et al. (WO-2019107960-A1, referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure; hereinafter Kim ‘960) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kim et al. (KR-20180087896-A; referencing foreign version for drawings and provide English translation for written disclosure; hereinafter Kim ‘896).
Regarding claim 10, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: a reflow stamp configured to bond the new element to the new bonding material by pressing and heating the new element, wherein the reflow stamp comprises: a pressure heater configured to heat the new element and the new bonding material while pressing the new element; and a buffer layer disposed around the pressure heater, the buffer layer being brought into close contact with elements around the new element when the pressure heater presses the new element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Kim ‘896 teaches further comprising: a reflow stamp (pressing portion 200, film 300, and laser irradiating unit 400, fig. 5; the pressing portion 200 is construed as being a “stamp”) configured to bond the new element (substitute element E2, fig. 5) to the new bonding material by pressing and heating the new element (bottom of page 9; heat is provided by the laser irradiating unit 400), wherein the reflow stamp comprises: a pressure heater (pressing portion 200, and laser irradiating unit 400, fig. 5) configured to heat the new element and the new bonding material while pressing the new element (bottom of page 9); and a buffer layer (film 300, fig. 5) disposed around the pressure heater (film 300 is extends to the left and right of the portion 200 and unit 400, fig. 5), the buffer layer being brought into close contact with elements around the new element (substitute element E2, fig. 5) when the pressure heater presses the new element (bottom of page 9).
Kim ‘896, fig. 5
PNG
media_image8.png
684
876
media_image8.png
Greyscale
.Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Kim ‘896, by using a pressing portion 200, film 300, and laser irradiating unit 400, as taught by Kim ‘896, instead of a heating unit 550, as taught by Han, in order to press the part while the laser melts the replacement solder, for the advantage of ensuring that that substitute element 2 is surely adhered to the substrate (Kim ‘896, bottom of page 9).
Regarding claim 11, Han teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the reflow stamp further comprises: a load control portion for removal, the load control portion configured to be bent and deformed upon receiving pressing force such that a zero-stiffness load smaller than a critical damage load of the defective element is applied to the defective element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of microelement transfer devices, Kim ‘960 teaches wherein the reflow stamp (fig. 3) further comprises: a load control portion (load control layer 220, fig. 9; “PDMS,” page 11; construed as silicone rubber) for removal (the plate-type transfer device taught in fig. 3 of Kim ‘960 is construed as being the pressing portion 200 taught by Kim ‘896, which is used for reflowing the solder onto the substitute element), the load control portion configured to be bent and deformed (load control layer 220 is bent and deformed, fig. 9) upon receiving pressing force (force “F,” fig. 9) such that a zero- stiffness load (zero stiffness region ZA1, fig. 6) smaller than a critical damage load of the new element is applied to the new element (“breakage of the micro element 50 can be prevented,” page 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Han, in view of the teachings of Kim ‘960, by using a plate-type transfer device, as taught by Kim ‘960, as the pressing plate 200, as taught by Kim ‘896, where the film 300, as taught by Kim ‘896, had a carrier film 200 on the bottom surface, as taught by Han, such that the compression force was kept below a region ZA1, as taught by Han, in order to use a flexible plate-type stamp transfer device, which is widely used, where the transfer device includes an elastic carrier film that deforms, for the advantage of ensuring that the micro element is not damaged, even in the event that there is a load control error in the pressing force applied to the micro element by the transfer device (Kim ‘960, pages 6 and 10).
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 28 April 2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new rejections of Han and Kim combined with Jeung.
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 ERWIN J WUNDERLICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6995. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:30.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/ERWIN J WUNDERLICH/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/2/2026
Prosecution Insights