***withdraw the previous action mailed ***
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 .
Withdrawal of Previous Action
Upon review of the Final Rejection mailed 06/10/2026, an error appeared. Therefore, this new Final Rejection set forth below replaces the previous action mailed 06/10/2026.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 04/24/2026:
Claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16 are pending in the current application. Claims 1 and 4-5 have been amended.
The Examiner wishes to note that the claims have not been properly marked up.
In the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/03/2026, claim 4 was objected to for including allowable subject matter, however, being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 1).
Original claim 4 (from the claim set dated 10/27/2025) recited “The method of claim 1, wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell”.
In the current claim set (dated 04/24/2026), Applicant’s amended claim 4 shows “The method of claim 1, wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises” crossed out and the rest of the limitations of the claim underlined. Further, the recitation of “introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell” has been completely omitted from the amended claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Remarks on Pages 6 and 9 state that allowable claim 4 has been amended into appropriate independent form.
In the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/03/2026, claim 4 was objected to for including allowable subject matter, however, being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 1).
Original claim 4 (from the claim set dated 10/27/2025) recited “The method of claim 1, wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell”.
In amended claim 4 (from the claim set dated 04/24/2026) Applicant omitted the recitation of “introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell” from claim 1 of which original claim 4 depended. Further, in amended claim 4, Applicant omitted the recitation of “wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell” which was the entire subject matter of original claim 4.
Therefore amended claim 4 does not include the original subject matter that was indicated as allowable.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 of the claims have been considered but are moot due to the amendment to the claims.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 6, 8, and 11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 should recite “the first electrochemical cell” not “a first electrochemical cell”.
Claim 2 should recite “the first feed stream” not “a first feed stream”.
Claim 6 should recite “the second electrochemical cell” not “a second electrochemical cell”.
Claim 8 should recite “the first product stream” not “a first product stream”.
Claim 11 should recite “the second cathode” not “a second cathode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant has amended claim 1 to recite “introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell, the first feed stream comprising air”.
As written, claim 1 indicates the first feed stream to have three components: carbon dioxide, dioxygen, and air.
Previous claim 3 (from the claim set dated 10/27/2025), which was indicated as including allowable subject matter in the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/03/2026, recited “wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing air into the first electrochemical cell”.
Previous claim 3 indicated that the carbon dioxide and dioxygen is a result of/part of air being introduced into the first electrochemical cell.
It is found that Applicant does not have possession of the claimed invention for a first feed stream comprising three separate components of carbon dioxide, dioxygen, and air.
MPEP 2163 I states “To satisfy the written description requirement, a patent specification must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. See, e.g., Moba, B.V. v. Diamond Automation, Inc., 325 F.3d 1306, 1319, 66 USPQ2d 1429, 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003); Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d at 1563, 19 USPQ2d at 1116.”
Applicant’s specification (PGPUB US 20230226486 A1) states:
“Methods and systems for capturing and concentrating CO2 from a source stream, such as ambient air, are disclosed” (P19).
“The first electrochemical cell 110 continuously captures CO2 from the source stream, such as air (e.g., ambient air, atmospheric air), and substantially simultaneously generates electricity, heat, and H2O” (P38).
“The first feed stream 118 may be an air feed stream (e.g., an atmospheric air feed stream, an ambient air feed stream), which includes the CO2, nitrogen, oxygen, and other gases, with the nitrogen and oxygen being present at a relatively greater amount relative to the CO2 and the other components” (P45).
“The system and associated device disclosed herein directly and continuously capture CO2 from a source stream, such as ambient air…” (P73).
There does not appear to be support in Applicants specification for the first feed stream to have three separate components: carbon dioxide, dioxygen, and air. Instead, Applicant’s specification gives support for the first feed stream to include air, wherein the air itself comprises/results in the carbon dioxide and dioxygen inside the first feed stream.
For the purposes of compact prosecution with respect to claim 1 (and thus its dependents), the claim will be interpreted as if claim 1 has been corrected and amended to incorporate the entirety of previous dependent claim 3 (“wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing air into the first electrochemical cell”). The claim is indicated as allowable below with this assumption.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “The method of claim 4, wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a feed stream from a coal fired power plant or from an ethanol fermenter into the first electrochemical cell.”
Claim 5 has been amended to depend from claim 4.
Applicant has amended claim 4 to recite “A method for capturing carbon dioxide, the method comprising: reducing the carbon dioxide to carbonate ions at a first cathode of the first electrochemical cell; reducing the carbonate ions at a first anode of the first electrochemical cell to produce a first product stream comprising concentrated carbon dioxide and a second product stream comprising water; introducing a second feed stream comprising water to a second electrochemical cell coupled to the first electrochemical cell; oxidizing the water of the second feed stream at a second anode of the second electrochemical cell to produce hydrogen ions and dioxygen gas; reducing the hydrogen ions to hydrogen gas at a second cathode of the second electrochemical cell; transporting the hydrogen gas produced by the second cathode of the second electrochemical cell to the first anode of the first electrochemical cell; and removing the first product stream from the first electrochemical cell”.
Applicant’s Remarks on Page 6 state that allowable claim 4 has been amended into appropriate independent form.
In the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/03/2026, claim 4 was objected to for including allowable subject matter, however, being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 1). In the Non-Final Rejection it was stated that claim 4 is objected to but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitation of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Original claim 4 (from the claim set dated 10/27/2025) recited “The method of claim 1, wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell”.
However, it appears Applicant has omitted the subject matter of original claim 4 from amended claim 4, even thought Applicant’s Remarks note that claim 4 was objected to for including allowable subject matter and has been amended into appropriate independent form.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that amended claim 4 should further recite “wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide into the first electrochemical cell” as Applicant states they have amended allowable claim 4 into the appropriate independent form.
As stated previously, claim 5 has been amended to depend from claim 4.
In view of the Examiner’s position that claim 4 should recite the limitation “a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide”, it is found that Applicant does not have possession of the claimed invention for a first feed stream comprising less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide wherein the first feed stream is a feed stream from a coat fired power plant or from an ethanol fermenter.
MPEP 2163 I states “To satisfy the written description requirement, a patent specification must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. See, e.g., Moba, B.V. v. Diamond Automation, Inc., 325 F.3d 1306, 1319, 66 USPQ2d 1429, 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003); Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d at 1563, 19 USPQ2d at 1116.”
Applicant’s specification (PGPUB US 20230226486 A1) states:
“The first feed stream 118 introduced to the first electrochemical cell 110 of the system 100 may be a dilute CO2-containing feed stream that contains less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of the CO2” (P44).
“…the first feed stream 118 may be a more concentrated CO2-containing feed stream, such as containing CO2 at greater than or equal to about 1000 ppm…For example, the first feed stream 118 may be a CO2-containing feed stream from a coal fired power plant or from an ethanol fermenter” (P45).
There does not appear to be support in Applicants specification for the first feed stream to comprises less than about 1200 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide when the first feed stream is a feed stream from a coat fired power plant or from an ethanol fermenter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, Applicant has amended claim 4 to recite:
“A method for capturing carbon dioxide, the method comprising:
reducing the carbon dioxide to carbonate ions at a first cathode of the first electrochemical cell;
reducing the carbonate ions at a first anode of the first electrochemical cell to produce a first product stream comprising concentrated carbon dioxide and a second product stream comprising water;
introducing a second feed stream comprising water to a second electrochemical cell coupled to the first electrochemical cell;
oxidizing the water of the second feed stream at a second anode of the second electrochemical cell to produce hydrogen ions and dioxygen gas;
reducing the hydrogen ions to hydrogen gas at a second cathode of the second electrochemical cell;
transporting the hydrogen gas produced by the second cathode of the second electrochemical cell to the first anode of the first electrochemical cell; and
removing the first product stream from the first electrochemical cell”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the carbon dioxide" and “the first electrochemical cell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner is interpreting the claim as if it states “introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell” as a limitation (as in claim 1 and previous claim 1).
The Examiner notes that if claim 4 is corrected to incorporate the original scope of claim 1 plus claim 4 and claim 5 is cancelled, then claim 4 would be allowed.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jahnke et al (US 20180261864 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Jahnke discloses a method for capturing carbon dioxide, the method comprising:
introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell (enriched flue gas stream (first exhaust stream) in fuel cell supply line 154 goes into fuel cell 30 in Fig. 2; molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC); flue gas stream supplies carbon dioxide and oxygen for the cathode of the fuel cell 30; see entire disclosure and especially P40, 50);
reducing the carbon dioxide to carbonate ions at a first cathode of the first electrochemical cell (see entire disclosure and especially P49, 50 and Fig. 2);
reducing the carbonate ions at a first anode of the first electrochemical cell to produce a first product stream comprising concentrated carbon dioxide and a second product stream comprising water (“The reaction results in the production of water and carbon dioxide, which form an anode exhaust stream, and electrons, which drive the production of electricity”, P42; “To remove the CO2, at the sequester system 40, the anode exhaust stream is cooled and water present in the stream is condensed out”, P44; “Due to the electrochemical reactions produced in the fuel cell 30, as described in detail above, an anode exhaust stream (second exhaust stream), which comprises a high concentration of CO2 (e.g., about 70% or more), is released from the anode 34”, P48; the anode produces two products, carbon dioxide and water stream; these two products are separated into two product streams at the sequester system; therefore, the anode produces two product streams via the sequester, one of carbon dioxide and one of water);
introducing a second feed stream comprising water to a second electrochemical cell coupled to the first electrochemical cell (return line 144, of which water has been added through water supply line 146, enters the anode of reformer-electrolyzer-purifier (REP) cell 162 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P45, 49);
oxidizing the water of the second feed stream at a second anode of the second electrochemical cell to produce hydrogen ions and dioxygen gas (see entire disclosure and especially P49 and Fig. 2);
reducing the hydrogen ions to hydrogen gas at a second cathode of the second electrochemical cell (flue gas is produced, which would inherently contain some hydrogen gas since the cell is a reformer-electrolyzer-purifier cell; see entire disclosure and especially P45, 49);
transporting the hydrogen gas produced by the second cathode of the second electrochemical cell to the first anode of the first electrochemical cell (the flue gas stream goes through fuel cell supply line 154 to fuel cell 30 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P50); and
removing the first product stream from the first electrochemical cell (the first product stream leaves fuel cell 30 through anode exhaust line 132 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P48).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 6-11, and 16 are allowed, upon the assumption set forth in the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the invention of claims 1-2, 6-11, and 16.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell” and “wherein introducing a first feed stream comprising carbon dioxide and dioxygen into a first electrochemical cell comprises introducing air into the first electrochemical cell”.
Previously cited Jahnke discloses the first feed stream includes a flue gas stream (P40, 50). Jahnke does not disclose wherein the first feed stream includes air.
Previously cited Milewski et al (Experimental investigation of CO2 separation from lignite flue gases by 100 cm2 single Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell) looks at separation of lignite flue gases by a molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC). Milewski teaches that the flue gases contain an insufficient amount of oxygen, therefore, an addition of air is needed to increase the amount of CO2 able to be separated (Page 1561, Right Column).
However, while it is known to add air to flue gas to ensure sufficient oxygen for CO2 separation in a MCFC, Jahnke teaches their flue gas stream is enriched with greater concentrations of oxygen and carbon dioxide (P49). Further Jahnke’s disclosure is drawn to providing a CO2 recovery system that generates flue gas enriched with O2 prior to its input into the fuel cell such that a higher output value may be realized, further offsetting the costs of capturing CO2 from the flue gas and increasing the overall efficiency of the power plant (P9). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have no reason to add air to the first feed (flue gas) stream of Jahnke.
Through search and consideration of the claims, previously cited Jahnke has been found to be the closest prior art to the claimed invention. There has been no other art found to remedy the deficiencies of Jahnke.
Therefore, the references fail to teach or suggest the particulars of independent claim 1 and it’s not obvious to modify these teachings to give the instant claimed invention. Thus none of the prior art of the record teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the invention of independent claim 1. Since claims 2, 6-11, and 16 depend on claim 1, they are allowable for the same reason.
Claims 12-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the invention of claims 12-14.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “A method for capturing carbon dioxide, the method comprising: introducing a first feed stream comprising air into a molten carbonate fuel cell maintained at a temperature of from about 500 °C to about 700 °C; reducing carbon dioxide from the air to carbonate ions at a cathode of the molten carbonate fuel cell; transporting the carbonate ions through an electrolyte of the molten carbonate fuel cell; reducing the carbonate ions at an anode of the molten carbonate fuel cell to produce a first product stream comprising carbon dioxide and a second product stream comprising water; introducing the second product stream comprising water to a proton conducting electrolyzer coupled to the molten carbonate fuel cell and maintained at a temperature of from about 500°C to about 700 °C; oxidizing the water of the second product stream at an anode of the proton conducting electrolyzer to produce hydrogen ions and dioxygen gas; transporting the hydrogen ions through an electrolyte of the proton conducting electrolyzer; reducing the hydrogen ions to hydrogen gas at a cathode of the proton conducting electrolyzer; and transporting the hydrogen gas to the anode of the molten carbonate fuel cell; and recovering the first product stream from the molten carbonate fuel cell.”
Previously cited Jahnke discloses a method for capturing carbon dioxide, the method comprising: introducing a first feed stream into molten carbonate fuel cell (enriched flue gas stream (first exhaust stream) in fuel cell supply line 154 goes into fuel cell 30 in Fig. 2; molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC); flue gas stream supplies carbon dioxide and oxygen for the cathode of the fuel cell 30; see entire disclosure and especially P40, 50);
reducing the carbon dioxide to carbonate ions at a cathode of the molten carbonate fuel cell (see entire disclosure and especially P49, 50 and Fig. 2); transporting the carbonate ions through an electrolyte of the molten carbonate fuel cell (see entire disclosure and especially P42); reducing the carbonate ions at an anode of the molten carbonate fuel cell to produce a first product stream comprising concentrated carbon dioxide and a second product stream comprising water (“The reaction results in the production of water and carbon dioxide, which form an anode exhaust stream, and electrons, which drive the production of electricity”, P42; “To remove the CO2, at the sequester system 40, the anode exhaust stream is cooled and water present in the stream is condensed out”, P44; “Due to the electrochemical reactions produced in the fuel cell 30, as described in detail above, an anode exhaust stream (second exhaust stream), which comprises a high concentration of CO2 (e.g., about 70% or more), is released from the anode 34”, P48; the anode produces two products, carbon dioxide and water stream; these two products are separated into two product streams at the sequester system; therefore, the anode produces two product streams via the sequester, one of carbon dioxide and one of water);
introducing a second feed stream comprising water to a proton conducting electrolyzer coupled to the molten carbonate fuel cell (return line 144, of which water has been added through water supply line 146, enters the anode of reformer-electrolyzer-purifier (REP) cell 162 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P45, 49); oxidizing the water of the second feed stream at an anode of the proton conducting electrolyzer to produce hydrogen ions and dioxygen gas (see entire disclosure and especially P49 and Fig. 2); transporting the hydrogen ions through an electrolyte of the proton conducting electrolyzer (see entire disclosure and especially P49);
reducing the hydrogen ions to hydrogen gas at a cathode of the proton conducting electrolyzer (flue gas is produced, which would inherently contain some hydrogen gas since the cell is a reformer-electrolyzer-purifier cell; see entire disclosure and especially P45, 49); transporting the hydrogen gas to the anode of the molten carbonate fuel cell (the flue gas stream goes through fuel cell supply line 154 to fuel cell 30 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P50); and recovering the first product stream from the molten carbonate fuel cell (the first product stream leaves fuel cell 30 through anode exhaust line 132 in Fig. 2; see entire disclosure and especially P48).
Previously cited Bosio teaches the operating temperature range of molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs) is about 925–955 K (651.85 - 681.85 °C; Abstract), and previously cited Barelli teaches molten carbonate electrolyzers are derived from the MCFC technology that is based on a molten carbonate electrolyte suspended in a porous and chemically inert ceramic matrix, and their operating temperature is in the range of 620-680 °C (Page 14923, Left Column). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of both Bosio and Barelli and chosen the operating/maintenance temperature of the two electrochemical cells to be between 651.85 and 680 °C.
Previously cited Jahnke includes the first feed stream includes as a flue gas stream (P40, 50). Jahnke does not disclose wherein the first feed stream includes air.
Milewski et al (Experimental investigation of CO2 separation from lignite flue gases by 100 cm2 single Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell) looks at separation of lignite flue gases by a molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC). Milewski teaches that the flue gases contain an insufficient amount of oxygen, therefore, an addition of air is needed to increase the amount of CO2 able to be separated (Page 1561, Right Column).
However, while it is known to add air to flue gas to ensure sufficient oxygen for CO2 separation in a MCFC, Jahnke teaches their flue gas stream is enriched with greater concentrations of oxygen and carbon dioxide (P49). Further Jahnke’s disclosure is drawn to providing a CO2 recovery system that generates flue gas enriched with O2 prior to its input into the fuel cell such that a higher output value may be realized, further offsetting the costs of capturing CO2 from the flue gas and increasing the overall efficiency of the power plant (P9). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have no reason to add air to the first feed (flue gas) stream.
Through search and consideration of the claims, previously cited Jahnke has been found to be the closest prior art to the claimed invention. There has been no other art found to remedy the deficiencies of Jahnke.
Therefore, the references fail to teach or suggest the particulars of independent claim 12 and it’s not obvious to modify these teachings to give the instant claimed invention. Thus none of the prior art of the record teaches, suggests, or renders obvious the invention of independent claim 12. Since claims 13-14 depend on claim 12, they are allowable for the same reason.
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 Mary Harris whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/M.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights