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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 and 11-19 are currently pending;
Claim 10 is canceled;
Claims 18-19 are new;
Claims 1, 13, and 17 are amended.
Status of Objections and Rejections Pending Since the Office Action of 09/24/2025
The 103 rejections of claims 1-9 and 10-17 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment and replaced with new 103 rejections.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 includes the limitation “at least one of succinonitrile, or adiponitrile; and based…” in lines 2-3 that should be corrected to “at least one of succinonitrile or adiponitrile; and based…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 12-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US-20180062201-A1), hereinafter Zhu, in view of Cho et al. (US-20190148776-A1), hereinafter Cho.
Regarding claim 1, Zhu teaches an electrochemical apparatus ([0009] electrochemical cell), comprising a negative electrode plate and an electrolyte ([0009] anode and a liquid electrolyte); wherein, the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on the negative electrode current collector ([0003] silicon anodes in lithium ion batteries; Zhu does not explicitly state that there is a negative current collector, but it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art that there would be a negative electrode current collector given fig. 1); the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode active material, the negative electrode active material contains a silicon-based active material ([0003] silicon anodes), and a mass percentage of the silicon-based active material based on a mass of the negative electrode active material is X% ([0044] silicon-based anode is a composite with greater than 50% graphite, meaning there is a mass percentage “X%” of silicon between 0% and 50%); the electrolyte contains metal ions ([0031] metal group such as lithium, sodium, cesium, or magnesium; Table 1), wherein based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass proportion of the metal ions is A ppm; and 0 < X/A ≤ 8 ([0029]-[0030] the weight percent of additive in the electrolyte is less than 5 weight percent; Table 1 shows different nitrate additives, for example Mg(NO3)2 with a weight percent in the electrolyte of 0.5 wt%. Given the known molecular weights of Mg (approximately 24), N (approximately 14), and O (approximately 16), magnesium constitutes approximately 810 ppm of the electrolyte:
24
24
+
14
*
2
+
(
16
*
3
*
2
)
×
0.5
w
t
%
=
0.081
w
t
%
m
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
=
810
p
p
m
o
f
m
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
Given that graphite constitutes greater than 50% of the anode material ([0044]) silicon must constitute between 0% and 50% percent of the anode material, meaning X/A ranges from 0% silicon/810 ppm magnesium to 50wt% silicon/810 ppm magnesium or 0<X/A≤0.062). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Zhu fails to teach the electrolyte further contains fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile; and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the fluoroethylene carbonate is greater than 5% and less than or equal to 20%, a mass percentage of the 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile is 0.5% to 3%.
Cho is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additives for secondary battery electrolytes ([0037]). Cho teaches the electrolyte further contains fluoroethylene carbonate ([0037] fluoroethylene carbonate; [0058]) and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile ([0048]); and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the fluoroethylene carbonate is greater than 5% and less than or equal to 20% ([0039] the first additive is 0.5 to 20 wt% based on a total weight in the electrolyte; [0058]ratio of fluoroethylene carbonate given multiple components of the first additive; [0098]; [0102] gives specific example of 7.0 wt% fluoroethylene carbonate), a mass percentage of the 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile is 0.5% to 3% ([0102] specific example 2.0 wt%; [0052] 0.5 to 3 wt% of second additive). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile to the electrolyte of Zhu. Doing so reduces the degree of thickness variation in the battery at high temperatures (Cho [0050]) and a stronger film may be formed on the surface of the cathode under a high voltage, increasing discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio at high temperatures (Cho [0039]).
Regarding claim 2, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that the metal ions comprise at least one of magnesium ions, aluminum ions, zinc ions, calcium ions, titanium ions, cesium ions, or molybdenum ions (([0031] metal group such as lithium, sodium, cesium, or magnesium; Table 1 shows cesium ions in CsNO3, aluminum ions in Al(NO3)3, and magnesium ions in Mg(NO3)2).
Regarding claim 3, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein 10 ≤ A ≤ 8000 (Table 1 Mg(NO3)2 ; for the metal Mg, A is approximately 810 ppm).
Regarding claim 4, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein X% is in a range of 15% to 80 % ([0044] silicon-based anode is a composite with greater than 50% graphite, meaning there is a mass percentage “X%” of silicon between 0% and 50%). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 5, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein the electrolyte further contains at least one of anions NO32-, SO42-, SO32-, CO32-, or SiO32- (Table 1 NO32-; [0031]).
Regarding claim 6, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 5. Zhu also teaches that wherein based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass proportion of the anions is B ppm, wherein 5 ≤ B ≤ 10000 (Using the same example from Table 1 of Mg(NO3)2 at 0.5 wt% of the electrolyte, the anion is present at approximately 4190 ppm in the electrolyte:
14
*
2
+
(
16
*
3
*
2
)
24
+
14
*
2
+
(
16
*
3
*
2
)
×
0.5
w
t
%
=
0.419
w
t
%
a
n
i
o
n
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
=
4190
p
p
m
o
f
a
n
i
o
n
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
Regarding claim 7, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein 100 ≤ A ≤ 5000 (Table 1 Mg(NO3)2 ; for the metal Mg, A is approximately 810 ppm).
Regarding claim 8, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein X% is in a range of 15% to 40% ([0044] silicon-based anode is a composite with greater than 50% graphite, meaning there is a mass percentage “X%” of silicon between 0% and 50%). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 9, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 6. Zhu also teaches that wherein 100 ≤ B ≤ 10000 (Using the same example from Table 1 of Mg(NO3)2 at 0.5 wt% of the electrolyte, the anion is present at approximately 4190 ppm in the electrolyte).
Regarding claim 12, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu fails to teach wherein the electrolyte further contains 1,3-propanesultone; and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the 1,3-propanesultone is 0.5% to 5%.
Cho is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additives for secondary battery electrolytes ([0037]). Cho teaches that the electrolyte further contains 1,3-propanesultone ([0037] part of the first additive); and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the 1,3-propanesultone is 0.5% to 5%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists ([0039] first additive is 0.5 to 20 wt%; [0058] weight ratio; [0102]; [0098] specific examples 2.0 wt%). In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhu and added 1,3-propanesultone such as in Cho. Doing so allows for a stronger film to be formed on the surface of the cathode under a high voltage, increasing discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio at high temperatures (Cho [0039]).
Regarding claim 13, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu fails to teach wherein the electrolyte further contains an additive; the additive comprises at least one of succinonitrile, or adiponitrile; and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the additive is 0.5% to 5%.
Cho is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additives for secondary battery electrolytes ([0037]). Cho teaches that the electrolyte further contains an additive; the additive comprises at least one of succinonitrile or adiponitrile ([0037] succinonitrile); and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the additive is 0.5% to 5% ([0098] specific example 3 wt%;[0039] first additive is 0.5 to 20 wt%; [0058] weight ratio).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhu and added succinonitrile such as in Cho. Doing so allows for a stronger film to be formed on the surface of the cathode under a high voltage, increasing discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio at high temperatures (Cho [0039]).
Regarding claim 16, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein 0.001 ≤ X/A ≤ 4 (Given that graphite constitutes greater than 50% of the anode material ([0044]) silicon must constitute between 0% and 50% percent of the anode material, meaning X/A ranges from 0% silicon/810 ppm magnesium to 50wt% silicon/810 ppm magnesium or 0<X/A≤0.062 for the same example Table 1 of Mg(NO3)2 at 0.5 wt%). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 17, Zhu teaches an electronic apparatus, comprising an electrochemical apparatus ([0009] electrochemical cell); the electrochemical apparatus, comprising a negative electrode plate and an electrolyte ([0009] anode and a liquid electrolyte); wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on the negative electrode current collector ([0003] silicon anodes in lithium ion batteries; Zhu does not explicitly state that there is a negative current collector, but it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art that there would be a negative electrode current collector given fig. 1); the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode active material, the negative electrode active material contains a silicon-based active material ([0003] silicon anodes), and a mass percentage of the silicon-based active material based on amass of the negative electrode active material is X%; the electrolyte contains metal ions, wherein based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass proportion of the metal ions is A ppm, and 0 < X/A ≤ 8 ([0029]-[0030] the weight percent of additive in the electrolyte is less than 5 weight percent; Table 1 shows different nitrate additives, for example Mg(NO3)2 with a weight percent in the electrolyte of 0.5 wt%. Given the known molecular weights of Mg (approximately 24), N (approximately 14), and O (approximately 16), magnesium constitutes approximately 810 ppm of the electrolyte:
24
24
+
14
*
2
+
(
16
*
3
*
2
)
×
0.5
w
t
%
=
0.081
w
t
%
m
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
=
810
p
p
m
o
f
m
a
g
n
e
s
i
u
m
i
n
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
l
y
t
e
Given that graphite constitutes greater than 50% of the anode material ([0044]) silicon must constitute between 0% and 50% percent of the anode material, meaning X/A ranges from 0% silicon/810 ppm magnesium to 50wt% silicon/810 ppm magnesium or 0<X/A≤0.062). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Zhu fails to teach the electrolyte further contains fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile; and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the fluoroethylene carbonate is greater than 5% and less than or equal to 20%, a mass percentage of the 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile is 0.5% to 3%.
Cho is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of additives for secondary battery electrolytes ([0037]). Cho teaches the electrolyte further contains fluoroethylene carbonate ([0037] fluoroethylene carbonate; [0058]) and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile ([0048]); and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the fluoroethylene carbonate is greater than 5% and less than or equal to 20% ([0039] the first additive is 0.5 to 20 wt% based on a total weight in the electrolyte; [0058]ratio of fluoroethylene carbonate given multiple components of the first additive; [0098]; [0102] gives specific example of 7.0 wt% fluoroethylene carbonate), a mass percentage of the 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile is 0.5% to 3% ([0102] specific example 2.0 wt%; [0052] 0.5 to 3 wt% of second additive). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile to the electrolyte of Zhu. Doing so reduces the degree of thickness variation in the battery at high temperatures (Cho [0050]) and a stronger film may be formed on the surface of the cathode under a high voltage, increasing discharge capacity and capacity retention ratio at high temperatures (Cho [0039]).
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Cho, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (KR-20220004305-A), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 11, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Modified Zhu fails to teach wherein the electrolyte further contains vinylene carbonate; and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the vinylene carbonate is 0.5% to 5%. Modified Zhu instead teaches that the first additive contains vinylethylene carbonate (Cho [0037]), wherein the first additive in total is 0.5 wt% to 20 wt% of the total electrolyte (Cho [0039]), and specific examples wherein vinylethylene carbonate is used in 1 wt% (Cho [0098];[0102]).
Kim is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrolytes for secondary batteries ([0001]). Kim teaches that the electrolyte further contains vinylene carbonate ([0127] vinylethylene carbonate or vinylene carbonate); and based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the vinylene carbonate is 0.5% to 5% ([0127 3wt% of less).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced the vinylethylene carbonate in the first additive of modified Zhu with vinylene carbonate as they are art recognized equivalents as exemplified by Kim. Both achieve swelling improvement effects at high temperatures (Kim [0124]; [0127]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Cho as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (CN-113745645-A), hereinafter Chen.
Regarding claim 14, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu also teaches that wherein the negative electrode active material contains silicon-based active particles ([0003] silicon anodes; [0003] silicon particles).
Zhu fails to teach that a cross section of the negative electrode active material layer comprises a square region with an area of 200 μm2, wherein the number of silicon-based active particles accommodated in the square region is N, 1 ≤ N ≤ 50, and the cross section of the negative electrode active material layer is parallel to a thickness direction of the negative electrode active material layer.
Chen is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of secondary batteries with silicon negative electrodes ([0001]). Chen teaches that a cross section of the negative electrode active material layer comprises a square region with an area of 200 μm2, wherein the number of silicon-based active particles accommodated in the square region is N, 1 ≤ N ≤ 50, and the cross section of the negative electrode active material layer is parallel to a thickness direction of the negative electrode active material layer ([0014]the average silicon material particles in an area of 20 μm x 20 μm is 0.7-7 in a plane formed by the length and thickness directions of the negative electrode layer; it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art that given half of the area of 20 μm x 20 μm (400 μm2) of 200 μm2, it would be expected to see half of the number of particles at 0.35-3.5). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhu such that given a cross section square region with an area of 200 μm2, the number of silicon-based active particles is from 1 to 50 such as in Chen. Doing so improves the cycle performance of lithium-ion batteries (Chen [0014]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Cho as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dong et al. (US-20210249722-A1), hereinafter Dong.
Regarding claim 15, Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Zhu fails to teach that a compacted density of the negative electrode plate is M g/cm3, wherein 1 ≤ M ≤ 2.5.
Dong is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of secondary batteries using silicon-based materials as a negative active material ([0007]). Dong teaches that a compacted density of the negative electrode plate is M g/cm3, wherein 1 ≤ M ≤ 2.5 ([0026] compacted density of negative electrode satisfies 1.6 to 1.75 g/cm3). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhu to have a compacted density of the negative electrode plate of 1 ≤ compacted density ≤ 2.5 g/cm3. Doing so ensures that the secondary battery has an improved cycle life (Dong [0026]).
Claims 18-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Cho as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seong et al. (US-20240105994-A1), hereinafter Seong.
Regarding claim 18, modified Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Modified Zhu fails to teach wherein the electrolyte further contains at least one selected from the group consisting of anions SO42-, SO32-, CO32-, or SiO32-.
Seong is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrolyte additives ([0002]). Seong teaches wherein the electrolyte further contains at least one selected from the group consisting of anions SO42-, SO32-, CO32-, or SiO32-. (silicate SiO32- from a magnesium silicate additive).
Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhu and added the magnesium silicate additive of Seong to the electrolyte of Zhu. Doing so can improve the absorption and release of lithium ions (Seong [0002]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Zhu teaches all of the limitations of claim 18. Modified Zhu also teaches wherein based on the mass of the electrolyte, a mass proportion of the anions is B ppm, wherein 5 ≤B≤ 10000 ([0017] 50 to 70% oxygen, 5 to 20% magnesium, 15 to 35% silicon; [0091] magnesium silicate used in 0.3 wt % based on total weight of electrolyte, therefore the weight percentage of the silicate in this example is, at minimum, (0.5 (oxygen) + 0.15 (silicon)) * 0.3 wt% = 0.195 wt% = 1950 ppm). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
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 MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights