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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejection of claim 1 utilizing references Uchida and Jiang, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-9 have been withdrawn. The Examiner has made new grounds of rejections of claims 1-9 following the previous Non-Final Office Action mailed 08/19/2025, therefore necessitating this action to also be NON-FINAL.
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 10-20 are newly added.
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 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armour (US 20060021574 A1), in view of Uchida (US 20180190519 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Armour teaches a substrate processing apparatus comprising (Armour, Fig. 1, [0058], rotating disk reactor):
a processing chamber (Armour, Fig. 1, [0059], chamber 100);
a substrate support that is disposed in the processing chamber and holds a substrate (Armour, Fig. 1, [0059]-[0060], susceptor 145 holding wafers 135); and
a shower head facing the substrate support (Armour, Fig. 1, [0059]-[0062], outlet of injector head 150 faces susceptor 145), the shower head including:
a shower plate formed with a gas flow path through which a gas is discharged (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], carrier gas flows from carrier inlet tube 266 through to carrier chamber 260 and then out through porous downstream plate 230, also shown in Fig. 29 where carrier gas is received by carrier gas manifold 1830 via carrier gas passage 1980, and flows out through downstream plate 1730, [0144]); and
a cooling plate holding and cooling the shower plate (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235 of gas distribution plate 210, where sealing plate 205 is connected to gas distribution plate 210 via screws), and
the cooling plate including: a first plate (Armour, Fig. 2, [0075], sealing plate 205);
a second plate having a coolant passage through which a coolant is supplied (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235) and a gas diffusion space into which the gas distributed by the gas distribution layer is supplied (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], carrier gas flows from carrier inlet tube 266 through to carrier chamber 260, also shown in Fig. 29 where carrier gas is received by carrier gas manifold 1830 via carrier gas passage 1980, [0144]); and
a fastening member fastening the first plate and the second plate (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], sealing plate 205 is connected to gas distribution plate 210 via screws, and gas distribution plate 210, comprised of upstream plate 240, middle plate 235, and downstream plate 230 are joined by bolts).
Armour fails to teach a first plate having a gas distribution layer through which the gas is distributed.
However, Uchida teaches a first plate having a gas distribution layer through which the gas is distributed (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within).
Uchida is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 2, Armour teaches wherein the first plate includes: a connection interface layer to which the gas is supplied from a gas supply (Armour, Fig. 2, [0075]-[0080], sealing plate 205 connects to carrier inlet tube 265); and the second plate (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], middle plate 235, also shown as middle plate 1720 in Fig. 29).
Armour fails to teach the gas distribution layer through which the gas supplied from the connection interface layer is distributed; and a first intermediate interface layer through which the gas distributed by the gas distribution layer is supplied to the second plate.
However, Uchida teaches the gas distribution layer through which the gas supplied from the connection interface layer is distributed (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within); and a first intermediate interface layer through which the gas distributed by the gas distribution layer is supplied to the second plate (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 30 supplies gas from gas distribution plate 31 vertically down to next plate).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 3, Armour teaches wherein the second plate includes: a flow path forming layer having the coolant passage and the gas diffusion space into which the gas is supplied from the second intermediate interface layer (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235 of plate 210, carrier gas flows from carrier inlet tube 266 through to carrier chamber 260, also shown in Fig. 29 where carrier gas is received by carrier gas manifold 1830 via carrier gas passage 1980, [0144]); and a gas hole layer through which the gas is supplied from the gas diffusion space to the shower plate (Armour, Fig. 29, [0144], carrier gas is received by carrier gas manifold 1830 via carrier gas passage 1980 and out through porous screen 1735 in downstream plate 1730).
Armour fails to teach a second intermediate interface layer to which the gas is supplied from the first plate.
However, Uchida teaches a second intermediate interface layer to which the gas is supplied from the first plate (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 29 receives gas from gas distribution plate 30).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 4, Armour teaches the coolant passage (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235 of plate 210).
Armour fails to teach the gas distribution layer.
However, Uchida teaches the gas distribution layer (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within).
The combination of the gas distribution plates of Uchida with the apparatus of Armour, as recited in claim 1 above, places the coolant passages below the gas distribution layer. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 9, Armour teaches the second plate (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235 of plate 210).
Armour fails to teach the first plate.
However, Uchida teaches the first plate (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within).
The combination of the gas distribution plates of Uchida with the apparatus of Armour, as recited in claim 1 above, places the cooling plate below the gas distribution layer, where the processing space is located below the shower head, thus resulting in the second plate being disclosed closer to the processing space than the first plate. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 10, Armour teaches wherein the first plate includes:
a connection interface (IF) layer (Armour, Fig. 2, [0075]-[0080], sealing plate 205 connects to carrier inlet tube 265), and
gas is supplied from a gas supply directly to the connection (IF) layer (Armour, Fig. 2, [0075]-[0080], sealing plate 205 connects to carrier inlet tube 265, to which carrier gas is supplied).
Armour fails to teach the gas distribution layer; and
a first intermediate interface (IF) layer.
However, Uchida teaches the gas distribution layer (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within); and
a first intermediate interface (IF) layer (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 30 supplies gas from gas distribution plate 31 vertically down to next plate).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 11, Armour teaches wherein the connection IF layer includes a gas flow path (Armour, Fig. 2, [0075]-[0080], sealing plate 205 connects to carrier inlet tube 265, to which carrier gas is supplied and flows).
Armour fails to teach the gas distribution layer includes a distribution flow path that a gas supplied from the gas flow path provided in the connection IF layer to a plurality of gas flow paths provided in the first intermediate IF layer.
However, Uchida teaches the gas distribution layer includes a distribution flow path that a gas supplied from the gas flow path provided in the connection IF layer to a plurality of gas flow paths provided in the first intermediate IF layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52, branching out to gas supply paths 57a to 57d in gas distribution plate 30).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 18, Armour teaches wherein the second plate includes a flow path forming layer (Armour, Fig. 2, [0144], carrier gas passage 1980 in middle plate 1720 that leads to carrier gas manifold 1830), and a gas hole layer (Armour, Fig. 2, [0144], carrier gas passage 1980 in middle plate 1720 that leads to carrier gas manifold 1830, and flows out through downstream plate 1730).
Armour fails to teach wherein the second plate includes a second intermediate IF layer.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the second plate includes a second intermediate IF layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 29).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 19, Armour fails to teach wherein the gas is supplied from the first intermediate IF layer of the first plate to the second intermediate IF layer.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the gas is supplied from the first intermediate IF layer of the first plate to the second intermediate IF layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas flow paths 57 provide flow through gas distribution plates 30 and 29).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 20, Armour teaches the coolant passage (Armour, Fig. 2, [0073]-[0080], cooling channels 215 in middle plate 235 of plate 210).
Armour fails to teach the gas distribution layer.
However, Uchida teaches the gas distribution layer (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52 within).
The combination of the gas distribution plates of Uchida with the apparatus of Armour, as recited in claim 1 above, places the coolant passages below the gas distribution layer. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Claims 5 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armour (US 20060021574 A1) in view of Uchida (US 20180190519 A1), as applied in claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20, and further in view of Murakami (US 20170069470 A1).
The limitations of claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 5, Armour fails to teach wherein the gas distribution layer has a multilayer structure in which an upper surface gas flow path formed on an upper surface side, a lower surface gas flow path formed on a lower surface side, and a through-flow path passing through the upper surface side and the lower surface side are formed.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the gas distribution layer has a multilayer structure in which an upper surface gas flow path formed on an upper surface side (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52, which is a groove in the top surface of plate 31), and a through-flow path passing through the upper surface side and the lower surface side are formed (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply paths 57 penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Modified Armour fails to teach wherein the gas distribution layer has a lower surface gas flow path formed on a lower surface side.
However, Murakami teaches wherein the gas distribution layer has a lower surface gas flow path formed on a lower surface side (Murakami, Fig. 2, [0093], recess 24b formed on underside of intermediate member 24 in communication with multiple gas lines L12, [0068]-[0069]).
Murakami is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have modified the bottom of the gas distribution plate of Uchida to incorporate the recess as taught by Murakami as doing so would provide an additional gas diffusion space which helps reduce a difference in volumes of the supply paths, therefore making it possible to reduce a difference in time taken until the gases are discharged from the gas discharge openings of the corresponding regions after the gases are supplied into the supply paths (Murakami, [0014]).
Regarding claim 12, Armour fails to teach wherein the distribution flow path of the gas distribution layer includes:
a first through-flow path;
a communication flow path;
a second through-flow path;
a second distribution flow path; and
a third through-flow path.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the distribution flow path of the gas distribution layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52) includes:
a first through-flow path (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply path 57c penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction);
a second through-flow path (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply path 57b penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction);
a second distribution flow path (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52); and
a third through-flow path (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply path 57d penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Modified Armour fails to teach a communication flow path.
However, Murakami teaches a communication flow path (Murakami, Fig. 2, [0093], recess 24b formed on underside of intermediate member 24 in communication with multiple gas lines L12, [0068]-[0069]).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have modified the bottom of the gas distribution plate of Uchida to incorporate the recess as taught by Murakami as doing so would provide an additional gas diffusion space which helps reduce a difference in volumes of the supply paths, therefore making it possible to reduce a difference in time taken until the gases are discharged from the gas discharge openings of the corresponding regions after the gases are supplied into the supply paths (Murakami, [0014]).
Regarding claim 13, Armour fails to teach wherein the communication flow path is a recessed groove formed on a lower surface side of the gas distribution layer and an upper surface of the first intermediate IF layer, and
the communication flow path communicates the first through-flow path and the second through-flow path.
However, Uchida teaches the first intermediate IF layer (Uchida, Fig. 10, [0060], gas distribution plate 30 supplies gas from gas distribution plate 31 vertically down to next plate), and
the first through-flow path (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply path 57c penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction) and the second through-flow path (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply path 57b penetrates gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Modified Armour fails to teach wherein the communication flow path is a recessed groove formed on a lower surface side of the gas distribution layer, and
the communication flow path communicates the first through-flow path and the second through-flow path.
However, Murakami teaches wherein the communication flow path is a recessed groove formed on a lower surface side of the gas distribution layer (Murakami, Fig. 2, [0093], recess 24b formed on underside of intermediate member 24), and
the communication flow path communicates the first through-flow path and the second through-flow path (Murakami, Fig. 2 and Fig. 7, [0093], recess 24b formed on underside of intermediate member 24 communicates plural gas lines L12 in space D11, [0071]).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have modified the bottom of the gas distribution plate of Uchida to incorporate the recess as taught by Murakami as doing so would provide an additional gas diffusion space which helps reduce a difference in volumes of the supply paths, therefore making it possible to reduce a difference in time taken until the gases are discharged from the gas discharge openings of the corresponding regions after the gases are supplied into the supply paths (Murakami, [0014]).
Regarding claim 14, Armour fails to teach wherein the second distribution flow path is a recessed groove formed on an upper surface side of the gas distribution layer and a lower surface of the connection IF layer, and
the second distribution flow path communicates the second through-flow path and the third through-flow path.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the second distribution flow path is a recessed groove formed on an upper surface side of the gas distribution layer and a lower surface of the connection IF layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas distribution plate 31 has gas supply path 52, which is a groove in the top surface of plate 31), and
the second distribution flow path communicates the second through-flow path and the third through-flow path (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas supply path 52 communicates gas supply paths 57b and 57d).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 15, Armour fails to teach wherein the third through-flow path is provided in plurality, and
the second distribution flow path branches into a plurality from the second through-flow path toward the plurality of third through-flow paths.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the third through-flow path is provided in plurality (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas supply paths 57a and 57d), and
the second distribution flow path branches into a plurality from the second through-flow path toward the plurality of third through-flow paths (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas supply path 52 branches from gas supply path 57b to paths 57d and 57a).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 16, Armour fails to teach wherein the second distribution flow path is formed such that flow path lengths from the second through-flow path to the respective third through-flow paths are equal to each other.
However, Uchida teaches wherein the second distribution flow path is formed such that flow path lengths from the second through-flow path to the respective third through-flow paths are equal to each other (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas supply path 52 branches from gas supply path 57b equally to paths 57d and 57a).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Regarding claim 17, Armour fails to teach wherein each of the plurality of third through-flow paths passes through the gas distribution layer in a plate thickness direction and communicates the second distribution flow path and the gas flow paths of the first intermediate IF layer.
However, Uchida teaches wherein each of the plurality of third through-flow paths passes through the gas distribution layer in a plate thickness direction (Uchida, Fig. 5, [0061], vertical gas supply paths 57d and 57a penetrate gas distribution plate 31 in the thickness direction) and communicates the second distribution flow path and the gas flow paths of the first intermediate IF layer (Uchida, Figs. 5, 7, and 10, [0060]-[0064], gas flow paths 57d and 57a connect gas supply path 52 and gas flow paths 57a and 57d in gas distribution plate 30).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have incorporated the gas distribution plates of Uchida between the carrier gas inlet and gas distribution plate of Armour as doing so would provide a mechanism to control the distribution of the carrier gas from the singular gas supply source in a desired arrangement via the branching lines (Uchida, [0019]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armour (US 20060021574 A1) in view of Uchida (US 20180190519 A1), as applied in claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20, and further in view of Carducci (US 20170365443 A1).
The limitations of claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 6, modified Armour fails to teach wherein a sealing member is provided on a facing surface of the first plate and the second plate.
However, Carducci teaches wherein a sealing member is provided on a facing surface of the first plate and the second plate (Carducci, Fig. 2, [0038], seals are provided between base plate 210 and body 142).
Carducci is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have incorporated the seals of Carducci into the apparatus of modified Armour as doing so would prevent leakage of gases at the interface of the cooling plate and gas distribution plate (Carducci, [0038]).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armour (US 20060021574 A1) in view of Uchida (US 20180190519 A1), as applied in claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20, and further in view of Chan (US 20210391156 A1).
The limitations of claims 1-4, 9-11, and 18-20 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 7, modified Armour fails to teach wherein the first plate and the second plate are formed of aluminum.
However, Chan teaches wherein the first plate and the second plate are formed of aluminum (Chan, Fig. 1A, [0033], showerhead plate 116 and heat transfer plate 118 are fabricated from aluminum or stainless steel).
Chan is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of semiconductor processing. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have chosen materials such as aluminum for the shower head components, as taught by Chan, because such components are RF conductive and therefore are capable of being RF powered for use in a plasma process (Chan, [0033]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Armour fails to teach wherein the first plate is formed of stainless steel, and the second plate is formed of aluminum.
However, Chan teaches wherein the first plate is formed of stainless steel, and the second plate is formed of aluminum (Chan, Fig. 1A, [0033], showerhead plate 116 and heat transfer plate 118 are fabricated from aluminum or stainless steel).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of filing to have chosen materials such as aluminum or stainless steel for the shower head components, as taught by Chan, because such components are RF conductive and therefore are capable of being RF powered for use in a plasma process (Chan, [0033]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Dunham (US 6284673 B1) teaches similar showerhead to the claimed invention with the cooling lines present below all gas distribution/diffusion spaces.
Kato (US 20040134611 A1) teaches middle gas plate with grooves/gas distribution areas on top and bottom surfaces.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TODD M SEOANE whose telephone number is (703)756-4612. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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.
/TODD M SEOANE/Examiner, Art Unit 1718 /GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718