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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for domestic benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) with application 63/389468.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on October 12, 2023, January 23, 2024, September, 9, 2024 and April 10, 2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-11, 13, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Klamkin et al. US 20170207600.
Regarding Claim 1, Klamkin teaches A laser (Fig. 23 Paragraph 0037 “FIG. 23 is a sideview schematic of a PIC where an EML chip is bonded to the Si chip in accordance with an embodiment of this invention;”) comprising:
an upper semiconductor structure (Fig. 23, 100 Paragraph 0061 “This component could be bonded to a first substrate, for example a Si PIC chip, which is element 102.”) comprising an upper waveguide (Fig. 23, 106 Paragraph 0062 “The waveguide layer, 106, contains an active medium for providing gain.”) and one or more lasing structures (Fig. 23, 2300 Paragraph 0109“a DBR mirror section (where the DBR mirror section has its own independent metal pad for wavelength tuning)”), wherein the upper waveguide comprises a first semiconductor material having a first bandgap; (Paragraph 0062 “The gain medium could use materials for the active region such as, but not limited to, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP), indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs), indium arsenide (InAs), InP, GaAs, aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs), indium gallium arsenide nitride (InGaAsN), indium gallium phosphide (InGaP), indium aluminum arsenide (InAlAs), indium antimonide (InSb), aluminum antimonide (AlSb), aluminum arsenide antimonide (AlAsSb), indium gallium antimonide (InGaSb), indium gallium aluminum antimonide (InGaAlSb), or many combinations therein.” Here InAs is chosen to be the first semiconductor material)
a lower semiconductor structure (Fig. 23, 102) comprising a lower waveguide (Fig. 23, 104 Paragraph 0066 “a Si waveguide layer 104”) between the upper waveguide and an output (Fig. 23 shows the lower waveguide is between the upper waveguide and an output along the optical path. The output is on the edge of the lower semiconductor structure and as such the lower waveguide is between the upper waveguide and the output), wherein the lower waveguide comprises a second semiconductor material having a second bandgap that is wider than the first bandgap (The second semiconductor material is Si which has a wider bandgap than InAs. InAs has a bandgap of 0.35 eV and Si has a band gap of 1.12 eV); and
a coupler (Fig. 23, 108 “Turning Mirror”) between the upper waveguide and the lower waveguide that couples optical energy of the upper waveguide to the lower waveguide. (Fig. 23 Shows the coupler between the upper and lower waveguide along the optical path. Paragraph 0011 “The substrates would contain light coupling elements such as turning mirrors, lenses, and grating couplers, or could be inherently surface illuminated or surface emitting (such as, but not limited to, a surface normal PIN PD, surface normal avalanche PD (APD), or surface emitting vertical cavity semiconductor optical amplifier (VCSOA)).”)
Regarding Claim 2, Klamkin teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) structure. (Fig. 23 shows the lasing structure is a DBR)
Regarding Claim 3, Klamkin teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed feedback (DFB) structure. (Paragraph 0112 “In alternative embodiments, a distributed feedback (DFB) laser could be incorporated as the laser of the EML flip chip, or any other DBR lasers (including two-mirror DBR lasers) could be incorporated.”)
Regarding Claim 5, Klamkin teaches a first portion of the upper waveguide overlaps a second portion of the lower waveguide; (Fig. 23 shows that the upper waveguide overlaps the second waveguide) and
the coupler couples the upper waveguide to the lower waveguide via the overlapping first portion and second portion. (Fig. 23 shows that the coupler couples the upper waveguide and the lower waveguide via the overlapping portions.)
PNG
media_image1.png
492
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, Klamkin teaches A laser (Fig. 23 Paragraph 0037 “FIG. 23 is a sideview schematic of a PIC where an EML chip is bonded to the Si chip in accordance with an embodiment of this invention;”) comprising:
a lower semiconductor structure (Fig. 23, 102) having a lower structure top side (The top of 102 is the lower structure top side), a lower structure bottom side (The bottom side of 102 is the lower structure bottom side), and lower structure lateral sides between the lower structure top side and the lower structure bottom side (The left and right sides of 102 are the lower structure lateral sides between the top and bottom sides), wherein the lower semiconductor structure comprises a lower waveguide (Fig. 23, 104) along the lower structure top side (Fig. 23 shows that 104 is along the lower structure top side);
an upper semiconductor structure (Fig. 23, 100) having an upper structure top side (The top of 100 is the upper structure top side), an upper structure bottom side (The bottom of 100 is the upper structure bottom side), and upper structure lateral sides between the upper structure top side and the upper structure bottom side (The left and right sides of 100 are the upper structure lateral sides and they are between the top side and the bottom side), wherein the upper semiconductor structure comprises an upper waveguide (Fig. 23, 106) along the upper structure bottom side (Fig. 23 shows that the upper waveguide is along the bottom side), and wherein the upper semiconductor structure is positioned over the lower structure top side such that a first portion of the upper waveguide vertically overlaps a second portion of the lower waveguide; (See annotated Fig. 23 below) and
a coupler (Fig. 23, 108 “Turning Mirror”) between the upper waveguide and the lower waveguide that couples optical energy of the upper waveguide to the lower waveguide. (Fig. 23 Shows the coupler between the upper and lower waveguide along the optical path. Paragraph 0011 “The substrates would contain light coupling elements such as turning mirrors, lenses, and grating couplers, or could be inherently surface illuminated or surface emitting (such as, but not limited to, a surface normal PIN PD, surface normal avalanche PD (APD), or surface emitting vertical cavity semiconductor optical amplifier (VCSOA)).”); and
wherein the lower waveguide comprises semiconductor material having a wider bandgap than semiconductor material of the upper waveguide. (Paragraph 0062 “The gain medium could use materials for the active region such as, but not limited to, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP), indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs), indium arsenide (InAs), InP, GaAs, aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs), indium gallium arsenide nitride (InGaAsN), indium gallium phosphide (InGaP), indium aluminum arsenide (InAlAs), indium antimonide (InSb), aluminum antimonide (AlSb), aluminum arsenide antimonide (AlAsSb), indium gallium antimonide (InGaSb), indium gallium aluminum antimonide (InGaAlSb), or many combinations therein.” Here InAs is chosen to be the first semiconductor material. The second semiconductor material is Si, see Paragraph 0066 “a Si waveguide 104” which has a wider bandgap than InAs. InAs has a bandgap of 0.35 eV and Si has a band gap of 1.12 eV)
PNG
media_image1.png
492
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Klamkin teaches the upper waveguide comprises one or more lasing structures. (Fig. 23, 2300 Paragraph 0109“a DBR mirror section (where the DBR mirror section has its own independent metal pad for wavelength tuning)”)
Regarding Claim 10, Klamkin teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) structure. (Fig. 23 shows the lasing structure is a DBR)
Regarding Claim 11, Klamkin teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed feedback (DFB) structure. (Paragraph 0112 “In alternative embodiments, a distributed feedback (DFB) laser could be incorporated as the laser of the EML flip chip, or any other DBR lasers (including two-mirror DBR lasers) could be incorporated.”)
Regarding Claim 13, Klamkin teaches the coupler couples the upper waveguide to the lower waveguide via the overlapping first portion and second portion. (Fig. 23 shows that the coupler couples the upper waveguide and the lower waveguide via the overlapping portions.)
Regarding Claim 16, Klamkin teaches A laser (Fig. 23 Paragraph 0037 “FIG. 23 is a sideview schematic of a PIC where an EML chip is bonded to the Si chip in accordance with an embodiment of this invention;”) comprising:
a wide bandgap (WBG) structure (Fig. 23, 102) comprising a lower waveguide along a top side of the WBG structure; (Fig. 23, 104 Paragraph 0066 “a Si waveguide layer 104” Fig. 23 shows that the lower waveguide is along the top side of the WBG structure)
a narrow bandgap (NBG) structure (Fig. 23, 100) over the WBG structure (Fig. 23 shows that the NBG structure is over the WBG structure), wherein the NBG structure comprises an upper waveguide (Fig. 23, 106 Paragraph 0062 “The waveguide layer, 106, contains an active medium for providing gain.”) along a bottom side of the NBG structure; and
a coupler (Fig. 23, 108 “Turning Mirror”) between the upper waveguide and the lower waveguide that couples optical energy of the upper waveguide to the lower waveguide. (Fig. 23 Shows the coupler between the upper and lower waveguide along the optical path. Paragraph 0011 “The substrates would contain light coupling elements such as turning mirrors, lenses, and grating couplers, or could be inherently surface illuminated or surface emitting (such as, but not limited to, a surface normal PIN PD, surface normal avalanche PD (APD), or surface emitting vertical cavity semiconductor optical amplifier (VCSOA)).”); and
wherein the WBG structure has a wider bandgap than the NBG structure. (Paragraph 0062 “The gain medium could use materials for the active region such as, but not limited to, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP), indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs), indium arsenide (InAs), InP, GaAs, aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs), indium gallium arsenide nitride (InGaAsN), indium gallium phosphide (InGaP), indium aluminum arsenide (InAlAs), indium antimonide (InSb), aluminum antimonide (AlSb), aluminum arsenide antimonide (AlAsSb), indium gallium antimonide (InGaSb), indium gallium aluminum antimonide (InGaAlSb), or many combinations therein.” Here InAs is chosen to be the first semiconductor material. The second semiconductor material is Si, see Paragraph 0066 “a Si waveguide 104” which has a wider bandgap than InAs. InAs has a bandgap of 0.35 eV and Si has a band gap of 1.12 eV)
Regarding Claim 17, Klamkin teaches the upper waveguide comprises one or more lasing structures. (Fig. 23, 2300 Paragraph 0109“a DBR mirror section (where the DBR mirror section has its own independent metal pad for wavelength tuning)”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4, 12, 19 are rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Klamkin in view of another embodiment of Klamkin.
Regarding Claim 4, Klamkin does not teach the coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler on a surface of the upper waveguide.
However,
Another embodiment of Klamkin teaches the coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler on a surface of the upper waveguide. (Paragraph 0092 “Instead of using an angled etched turning mirror, in another embodiment a grating could be formed in the flip chip designed for vertical emission.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coupler as taught by Klamkin having the angled turning mirror be a grating as disclosed by the another embodiment of Klamkin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the outcoupling efficiency. (Klamkin Paragraph 0092)
Regarding Claim 12, Klamkin does not teach he coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler on a surface of the upper waveguide.
However,
Another embodiment of Klamkin teaches the coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler on a surface of the upper waveguide. (Paragraph 0092 “Instead of using an angled etched turning mirror, in another embodiment a grating could be formed in the flip chip designed for vertical emission.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coupler as taught by Klamkin having the angled turning mirror be a grating as disclosed by the another embodiment of Klamkin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the outcoupling efficiency. (Klamkin Paragraph 0092)
Regarding Claim 19, Klamkin does not teach he coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler.
However,
Another embodiment of Klamkin teaches the coupler comprises a vertical grating coupler on a surface of the upper waveguide. (Paragraph 0092 “Instead of using an angled etched turning mirror, in another embodiment a grating could be formed in the flip chip designed for vertical emission.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coupler as taught by Klamkin having the angled turning mirror be a grating as disclosed by the another embodiment of Klamkin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the outcoupling efficiency. (Klamkin Paragraph 0092)
Claims 4, 14, 20 are rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Klamkin in view of Yamaoka et al. US 20220320813.
Regarding Claim 6, Klamkin teaches the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is less than 2 eV (As stated above InAs has a band gap of 0.35 eV); and
Klamkin does not teach the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV.
However,
Yamaoka teaches the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” SiC has a bandgap of greater than 3 eV as stated in the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the second semiconductor material be made of SiC as disclosed by Yamaoka. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that Si and SiC are both suitable materials for the lower waveguide material. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” Paragraph 0030 “a first core 103 made of Si”)
Regarding Claim 14, Klamkin teaches the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is less than 2 eV (As stated above InAs has a band gap of 0.35 eV); and
Klamkin does not teach the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV.
However,
Yamaoka teaches the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” SiC has a bandgap of greater than 3 eV as stated in the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the second semiconductor material be made of SiC as disclosed by Yamaoka. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that Si and SiC are both suitable materials for the lower waveguide material. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” Paragraph 0030 “a first core 103 made of Si”)
Regarding Claim 20, Klamkin teaches the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is less than 2 eV (As stated above InAs has a band gap of 0.35 eV); and
Klamkin does not teach the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV.
However,
Yamaoka teaches the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” SiC has a bandgap of greater than 3 eV as stated in the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the second semiconductor material be made of SiC as disclosed by Yamaoka. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that Si and SiC are both suitable materials for the lower waveguide material. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” Paragraph 0030 “a first core 103 made of Si”)
Claims 7, 15 are rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Klamkin in view of another embodiment of Klamkin and Yamaoka.
Regarding Claim 7, Klamkin does not teach the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV; and the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is between 3 eV and 6 eV.
However,
Another embodiment of Klamkin teaches the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV (Paragraph 0062 “The gain medium could use materials for the active region such as, but not limited to, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP), indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs), indium arsenide (InAs), InP, GaAs, aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs), indium gallium arsenide nitride (InGaAsN), indium gallium phosphide (InGaP), indium aluminum arsenide (InAlAs), indium antimonide (InSb), aluminum antimonide (AlSb), aluminum arsenide antimonide (AlAsSb), indium gallium antimonide (InGaSb), indium gallium aluminum antimonide (InGaAlSb), or many combinations therein.” InP has a band gap width that is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV according to the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the first semiconductor material be made of InP as disclosed by another embodiment of Klamkin. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that InP is suitable to be a upper waveguide.
Klamkin in view of Klamkin does not teach the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is between 3 eV and 6 eV.
However,
Yamaoka teaches the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” SiC has a bandgap is between 3 eV and 6 eV as stated in the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the second semiconductor material be made of SiC as disclosed by Yamaoka. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that Si and SiC are both suitable materials for the lower waveguide material. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” Paragraph 0030 “a first core 103 made of Si”)
Regarding Claim 15, Klamkin does not teach the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV; and the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is between 3 eV and 6 eV.
However,
Another embodiment of Klamkin teaches the first bandgap of the first semiconductor material is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV (Paragraph 0062 “The gain medium could use materials for the active region such as, but not limited to, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP), indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs), indium arsenide (InAs), InP, GaAs, aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs), indium gallium arsenide nitride (InGaAsN), indium gallium phosphide (InGaP), indium aluminum arsenide (InAlAs), indium antimonide (InSb), aluminum antimonide (AlSb), aluminum arsenide antimonide (AlAsSb), indium gallium antimonide (InGaSb), indium gallium aluminum antimonide (InGaAlSb), or many combinations therein.” InP has a band gap width that is between 1.34 eV and 2 eV according to the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the first semiconductor material be made of InP as disclosed by another embodiment of Klamkin. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that InP is suitable to be a upper waveguide.
Klamkin in view of Klamkin does not teach the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is between 3 eV and 6 eV.
However,
Yamaoka teaches the second bandgap of the second semiconductor material is greater than 3 eV. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” SiC has a bandgap is between 3 eV and 6 eV as stated in the application.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second semiconductor material as taught by Klamkin by having the second semiconductor material be made of SiC as disclosed by Yamaoka. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) MPEP 2144.07. The reference has demonstrated that Si and SiC are both suitable materials for the lower waveguide material. (Paragraph 0040 “Note that in the following, the first cladding layer 102 and the first core 103 were composed of SiC” Paragraph 0030 “a first core 103 made of Si”)
Claim 17 is rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Klamkin in view of Tanaka US 20180013264.
Regarding Claim 17, Klamkin teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) structure. (Fig. 23 shows the lasing structure is a DBR)
Klamkin does not teach the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed feedback structure.
However,
Tanaka teaches the one or more lasing structures comprises a distributed feedback structure. (Fig. 2, “A: SG-DFB”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the DBR laser as taught by Klamkin by adding the DFB structure as disclosed by Tanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to better tun the wavelength of the laser through the combination of the DBR and the DFB structures. (Tanaka Paragraph 0029)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Duan et al. EP 2463694 teaches many features found in Claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN SUTTON KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1859. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 571-272-1835. 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.
/STEPHEN SUTTON KOTTER/Examiner, Art Unit 2828 /MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828