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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
Examiner notes that in the instant application:
-Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, 14-53 are pending.
-Claims 4, 10, and 13 are cancelled.
-Claims 1, 3, 5, 9, and 12 are amended.
-Claims 30-53 are withdrawn.
Priority
Examiner noted in the previous Office Action, dated February 25, 2026, that in order to effectively benefit from the foreign priority date based on the application filed in the Republic of Korea on October 20, 2022, an English translation of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) filed together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate must be presented. The Applicant has not included these documents in the instant application. Therefore, the right to foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) is not considered perfected.
Title
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s replacement of the title of the invention to a new title which is more clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The objection to the title is hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 22, 2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive regarding the previously put forth rejection, but they are not persuasive as they relate to the previously cited prior art. In particular, Ha (U.S. Pub. 2021/0251090) is found to teach the newly amended limitations.
The rejection has been updated to address the newly amended limitations.
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 1-3, 5-9, 11-12, 14, 16-18, 20-22, 28, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0041601), hereinafter Oh, in view of Cho et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0198964), hereinafter Cho, and in further view of Ha et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0251090), hereinafter Ha.
For clarity and ease of reading the rejections below, Examiner will first define the following elements of Oh:
-The group consisting of elements (BL), (IN1), (IN2), (IN3), (IN4), (DL), (CS), (TR), (GL), and (DVL), a lower portion of a display panel ((DP); Figs. 4 and 11, Paragraph [0061]), will hereinafter be referred to as a ‘circuit element layer’ (CEL). See Fig. 11 and Paragraphs [0116]-[0126].
-The group consisting of elements (IN5), (IN6), and (LED), a middle portion of (DP), will hereinafter be referred to as a ‘light emitting element layer’ (LEL). See Fig. 11 and Paragraphs [0127]-[0130].
Regarding Claim 1, Oh teaches a display device ((1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) comprising:
-a support member ((SP); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0061]) including a first non-folding part, a second non-folding part, and a folding part (as within (FA1), (FA2), and (BA), respectively; Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) disposed between the first non-folding part (FA1) and the second non-folding part (FA2);
-a circuit element layer ((CEL) as part of (DP); Figs. 4 and 11), disposed on the support member (SP), and including at least one transistor ((TR); Fig. 11, Paragraph [0117]);
-a light emitting element layer ((LEL) as part of (DP); Figs. 4 and 11), disposed on the circuit element layer (CEL), and including at least one light emitting diode ((LED); Fig. 11, Paragraph [0130]);
-an encapsulation layer ((EC) as part of (DP); Figs. 4 and 11, Paragraph [0131]) disposed on the light emitting element layer (LEL), and including at least one of an organic encapsulation layer and an inorganic encapsulation layer (‘include at least one inorganic material layer and at least one organic material layer’, Paragraph [0131]);
-a touch sensing layer (Comprising (IN7) and (TE), as part of (DP); Figs. 4 and 11, Paragraph [0132]) disposed on the encapsulation layer (EC), and including at least one touch electrode (TE);
-a first adhesive layer (e.g. (AL3); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0133]) disposed on the touch sensing layer ((IN7) and (TE));
-a cover window ((CW); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0133]) disposed on the first adhesive layer (AL3);
-a protective film ((PL); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0113]) disposed on the cover window (CW); and
-a second adhesive layer ((AL6); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0061]) disposed on the support member (SP).
Oh does not specifically disclose a support member including:
-a first non-folding part including a glass, a second non-folding part including the glass
Cho teaches a foldable display device ((10); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0059]), comprising a support member ((400); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0059]) including:
- a first non-folding part ((400a); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0065]) including a glass (‘(400) may include a glass material’; Paragraph [0082]), a second non-folding part ((400b); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0065]) including the glass.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Cho into the device of Oh such that the support member includes a first non-folding part including a glass, and a second non-folding part including the glass. This would be due to the fact that doing so would reduce lasting deformation and improve device durability (Cho, Paragraphs [0082] and [0083]).
Neither Oh nor Cho explicitly teach:
-a filling material overlapping the folding part and not overlapping the first and second non-folding parts
Ha teaches teaches a foldable display device ((10); Fig. 5, Paragraph [0060]), comprising a support member ((4800); Fig. 14, Paragraphs [0078] and [0132]) including a first non-folding part, a second non-folding part, and a folding part (as within (103), (104), and (105), respectively; Fig. 14, Paragraph [0133]) disposed between the first non-folding part (103) and the second non-folding part (104), further comprising:
-a filling material (‘filler’ (4815); Fig. 8, Paragraph [0134]) overlapping the folding part (105) and not overlapping the first and second non-folding parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ha into the device of Oh as modified by Cho such that it further comprises a filling material overlapping the folding part and not overlapping the first and second non-folding parts. Futhermore, the incorporation would be done such that the filling member comprises a metal member and the metal member includes stainless steel (Ha, Paragraph [0115]). This would be due to the fact that doing so would reduce buckling (Ha, Paragraph [0114]).
Regarding Claim 2, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
-an opening (Cho, (OP1); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0081]) is defined in the folding part (Cho, (400) as within (FA1), Fig. 3, Paragraph [0081]).
Regarding Claim 3, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 2, wherein:
-the filling material fills the opening. (As by incorporation of the teachings of Ha (specifically filler (4815)) into Oh as modified by Cho as in Claim 1 above)
Regarding Claim 5, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 2, wherein:
-the filling member comprises a metal member (‘filler’ (4815) is stainless steel; Paragraph [0115]), wherein the metal member fills the opening (Cho, (OP1)).
Regarding Claim 6, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 5, wherein:
-the metal member (Ha, (4815)) includes stainless steel (Ha, Paragraph [0115]).
Regarding Claim 7, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
-an opening pattern (Cho, (OP1); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0081] and [0091]) is defined in the folding part (Cho, (400) as within (FA1), Fig. 3, Paragraph [0081]).
Regarding Claim 8, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 7, wherein:
-each of a plurality of openings (e.g. plurality of (HL) of (OP1); Fig. 8, Paragraph [0091]) included in the opening pattern has one of a rectangular shape, a rhombic shape, an elliptical shape, a corrugated shape, and a rectangular shape with rounded corners (e.g. ‘rhombus shape’ of (HL) in Fig. 8, Paragraph [0091]).
Regarding Claim 9, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 7, wherein:
-the filling material (Ha, (4815)) fills the opening pattern (Cho, (OP1)) (As by incorporation of the teachings of Ha (specifically filler (4815)) into Oh as modified by Cho as in Claim 1 above, See also Ha Fig. 14).
Regarding Claim 11, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
-a groove (Cho, (HL) as part of (OP1); Figs. 3 and 6, Paragraph [0081] and [0093]) is defined in the folding part (Cho, (400) as within (FA1), Fig. 3, Paragraph [0081]). (Examiner notes that the term ‘groove’ here is taken as a “long narrow channel” as is seen in Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 12, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 11, wherein:
-the filling material (Ha, (4815)) fills the groove (Cho, (HL)). (As by incorporation of the teachings of Ha (specifically filler (4815)) into Oh as modified by Cho as in Claim 1 above, See also Ha Figs. 14 and 15).
Regarding Claim 14, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
-a thickness of the support member is in a range of 0.15 mm to 0.2 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Oh such that a thickness of the support member is in a range of 0.15 mm to 0.2 mm (from the disclosed thickness range of 0.03 and 0.5 mm, Cho Paragraph [0085]). This is because it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). See also MPEP 2144.05 II.
Furthermore, the thickness of the support member is a result effective variable, wherein it is desirable to have a thickness large enough to avoid the risk of breaking but thin enough to maintain a thinner and lighter display device (Cho, Paragraph [0085]). Moreso, wherein a filling material is used (e.g. Cho, (800); Fig. 12, Paragraph [0109], comparable to incorporated Ha (4815)) one would be motivated to ensure the thickness of the support member is such that the filling material is fills the opening (Cho, (OP)).
Regarding Claim 16, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, further comprising:
-a first base substrate (Oh, (SB) as part of (DP); Figs. 4 and 11, Paragraph [0117]) disposed between the support member (Oh as modified by Cho, (SP)) and the circuit element layer (Oh, (CEL));
-a first barrier layer (Oh, (BL) as part of (CEL); Fig. 11, Paragraph [0119]) disposed on the first base substrate (Oh, (SB)); and
-a second base substrate (e.g. (110) as part of (CW); e.g. Fig. 8, Paragraph [0079]) disposed on the first barrier layer (BL).
Regarding Claim 17, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 16, wherein:
-each of the first base substrate (Oh, (SB)) and the second base substrate (Oh, (110)) includes polyimide (Paragraphs [0118] and [0081], respectively).
Regarding Claim 18, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 16, wherein:
- the first barrier layer (BL) includes silicon oxide (Paragraph [0119]).
Regarding Claim 19, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 16, wherein:
- the second base substrate (Oh, (110)) is in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms.
Regarding Claim 20, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
-the circuit element layer (Oh, (CEL)) includes:
a first active layer (Oh, ‘semiconductor layer’ (A) as part of (TR); Fig. 11, Paragraph [0120]) disposed on the support member (Oh as modified by Cho, (SP)); and
a second active layer (Oh, ‘gate electrode’ (G) as part of (TR); Fig. 11, Paragraph [0120]) disposed on the first active layer (Oh, (A)).
Regarding Claim 21, Oh as initially modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 20, wherein:
-the first active layer (Oh, (A)) includes a silicon semiconductor (Oh, e.g. polysilicon, Paragraph [0120])
Oh as initially modified by Cho and Ha does not teach
-the second active layer includes an oxide semiconductor.
Cho further teaches:
-the second active layer (‘gate electrode’ (GE), Fig. 4, Paragraph [0066]) includes an oxide semiconductor (e.g. indium tin oxide, Paragraph [0071]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the further teachings of Cho into the device of Oh as initially modified by Cho and Ha such that the second active layer includes an oxide semiconductor. This would be due to the fact that doing so would produce the predictable result of forming a functional second active layer (gate electrode) within the circuit element layer.
Regarding Claim 22, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, further comprising:
- a metal plate (Oh, (BF) ‘may be a metal sheet’; Fig. 4, Paragraph [0070]) disposed on the second adhesive layer (Oh, (AL6)).
Regarding Claim 28, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, wherein:
- the circuit element layer (Oh, (CEL)) includes a barrier layer ((BL), Fig. 11, Paragraph [0119]) disposed on the support member (Oh as modified by Cho, (SB)) and making contact (via intervening layers, e.g. AL6) with the support member (Oh as modified by Cho, (SB)).
Regarding Claim 29, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 28, wherein:
-the barrier layer (Oh, (BL)) includes silicon oxide (Oh, Paragraph [0119]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Cho and Ha and in further view of You et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0201874), hereinafter You.
Regarding Claim 15, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, but Oh, Cho, nor Ha teaches:
-the cover window includes ultra-thin tempered glass
You teaches a foldable display device ((1000); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0057]), comprising a cover window ((20); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0059]) wherein:
-the cover window (20) includes ultra-thin tempered glass (‘UTG’, Paragraph [0059])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of You into the device of Oh as modified by Cho and Ha such that the cover window includes ultra-thin tempered glass. This would be due to the fact that doing so would incorporate a thin yet strong material to protect the display panel (You, e.g. Paragraph [0059])
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Cho and Ha and in further view of Zhao et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0190074), hereinafter Zhao, and Jang et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0057834), hereinafter Jang.
Regarding Claim 19, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 16, but neither Oh nor Cho teaches:
-a thickness of each of the first base substrate and the second base substrate is in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms.
Zhao teaches display panel ((100); Fig. 1, Paragraph [0034]) on a first base substrate ((10); Fig. 1, Paragraph [0034]) made of polyimide (Paragraph [0039]), wherein:
-a thickness of the first base substrate (10) in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms (e.g. ‘10 micrometers’, Paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Zhao into the device of Oh as modified by Cho and Ha such that a thickness of the first base substrate in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms. This would be due to the fact that doing so would produce the predictable result of incorporating a flexible substrate while reducing device thickness.
Jang teaches foldable cover window ((WM); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0088]) including a second base substrate ((FI2); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0093]) made of polyimide (Paragraph [0097]), wherein:
-a thickness of the second base substrate (FI2) in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms (e.g. ‘10 μm’, Paragraph [0102]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Jang into the device of Oh as modified by Cho and Ha such that a thickness of the first base substrate in a range of 56,000 angstroms to 100,000 angstroms. This would be due to the fact that doing so would increase the durability and the impact resistance of the cover window (Jang, Paragraph [0141]) while reducing layer thickness.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Cho and Ha and in further view of An et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0407219), hereinafter An.
Regarding Claim 19, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1, but neither Oh, Cho, nor Ha teaches:
-a digitizer disposed on the second adhesive layer.
An teaches teaches a foldable display device ((260); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0057]), comprising a second adhesive (bottommost ‘adhesive’; Fig. 3, Paragraph [0094]) including:
-a digitizer ((321); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0094]) disposed on the second adhesive layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of An into the device of Oh as modified by Cho and Ha such that it further comprises a digitizer disposed on the second adhesive layer. This would be due to the fact that doing so would increase device functionality by allowing for additional inputs (i.e. via a stylus / electronic pen) (An, Paragraph [0097]).
Claims 24-27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Cho and Ha and in further view of Xiong et al. (U.S. Pub. 2023/0119924), hereinafter Xiong.
Regarding Claim 24, Oh as modified by Cho and Ha teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 1 upon which it depends, but neither Oh nor Cho explicitly teach:
-the first non-folding part further includes a first pattern that is adjacent to the folding part, and the second non-folding part further includes a second pattern that is adjacent to the folding part.
Examiner notes that Ha does teach this limitation (See, e.g. (PC2), Fig. 13, Paragraph [0130]). But for consistency of the incorporation of the filling material (being only in the folding part) and for ease of address latter dependent claims, an additional prior art incorporation is provided for the rejection.
Xiong teaches a support structure for a flexible display device (Fig. 3, Paragraph [0034]) comprising a first non-folding part (‘first region’ (4) on the left; Fig. 3, Paragraph [0039]) and a second non-folding part (first region (unmarked (4)) on the right; Fig. 3), wherein:
-the first non-folding part (left (4)) further includes a first pattern (‘third hollowed-out pattern’ on the left; identified as (11) in Fig. 3, Paragraph [0039]) that is adjacent to the folding part ((3); Fig. 3, Paragraph [0033]), and the second non-folding part (right (4)) further includes a second pattern (‘third hollowed-out pattern’ on the right; identified as (11) in Fig. 3, Paragraph [0039]) that is adjacent to the folding part (3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Xiong into the device of Oh as modified by Cho and Ha such that the first non-folding part further includes a first pattern that is adjacent to the folding part, and the second non-folding part further includes a second pattern that is adjacent to the folding part. This would be due to the fact that doing so would reduce the difference in stress between adjacent regions, facilitate the uniformity of stress distribution, and effectively prevent fracture of the support structure. (Xiong, Paragraph [0041]).
Regarding Claim 25, Oh, Cho, and Ha as further modified by Xiong teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 24, wherein:
-the support member (Oh, as modified by Cho and Xiong, (SP)) includes a first surface (top of (SP)) that is adjacent to the circuit element layer (Oh, (CEL)), and a second surface (bottom of (SP)) that is opposite to the first surface, and each of the first pattern and the second pattern (incorporated Xiong, ‘third hollowed-out pattern’ on (SP)) is defined on the second surface of the support member (As incorporated into Oh and Cho (SP)).
Regarding Claim 26, Oh, Cho, and Ha as further modified by Xiong teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 24, wherein:
-a height of each of the first pattern and the second pattern (Xiong, e.g. the height of a hole (31) of the pattern in the X direction of Fig. 3, (A) of Fig. 5) is smaller than a height of the folding part (Xiong, (3) height in the X direction), and a width of each of the first pattern and the second pattern (Xiong, e.g. the width a hole (31) of the pattern in the Y direction of Fig. 3, (D) of Fig. 5) is smaller than a width of the folding part (Xiong, (3) width in the Y direction).
Regarding Claim 27, Oh, Cho, and Ha as further modified by Xiong teaches the display device (Oh, (1); Fig. 4, Paragraph [0055]) of Claim 24, wherein:
- each of the first pattern and the second pattern includes an opening pattern or a groove (Xiong, Paragraphs [0039] and [0043]).
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 DMITRI MIHALIOV whose telephone number is (571)270-5220. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays 7:30 - 17:30 US Eastern Time.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at (571) 272-1945. 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.
/DMITRI MIHALIOV/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights