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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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, 10-15, and 21-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et al. (US 2020/0303465 A1) in view of Park et al. (US 2014/0131674 A1).
With respect to claim 1: Joo teaches “a display apparatus (DP) comprising: a first substrate (BS1); first to third light-emitting elements (OLED in PXA-B1, OLED in PXA-G1, OLED in PXA-R1; see paragraph 84) disposed over the first substrate (see Fig. 4) and each including a first-color emission layer (EML); a second substrate (BS2) disposed over the first substrate (see Fig. 4; BS2 is part of 200) with the first to third light- emitting elements therebetween (see Fig. 4); a bank (DML) disposed on a lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate (see Fig. 5), wherein first to third bank openings (OP1, OP2, OP3) are defined through the bank to respectively overlap the first to third light-emitting elements when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); a first color filter layer (CF-B) disposed between the bank and the second substrate and overlapping the first light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); a second color filter layer (CF-G) disposed between the bank and the second substrate and overlapping the second light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); a third color filter layer (CF-R) disposed between the bank and the second substrate and overlapping the third light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); a quantum-dot layer (CCF-B) disposed in the third bank opening to overlap the third light- emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); and a spacer (DM-C) disposed on a lower surface of the bank facing the first substrate and including a same material as a material of the quantum-dot layer (see Fig. 7)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “a second-color emission layer”.
However, Park teaches a display apparatus in which light emitting elements (Rp, Gp, Bp, Wp) have two or more color emission layers (142, 144, 146).
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the additional color emission layers of Park in order to realize excellent efficiency, maintain a color characteristic, and enable the simplification of a process and the saving of the manufacturing cost (Park paragraph 11).
With respect to claim 2: Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the quantum-dot layer includes a concave portion (part of CCF-R that is not DM-C) and a protrusion (DM-C), the concave portion is disposed in the third bank opening of the bank (see Fig. 7), and the protrusion is disposed on a surface of the bank facing the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 3: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 2 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the protrusion and the concave portion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 10: Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the bank does not include a liquid repellent or hydrophobic material (paragraphs 129, 101)”.
With respect to claim 11: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the first color filter layer allows light from the first-color emission layer to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a blue filter is understood to let blue light pass), the second color filter layer allows light from the second-color emission layer to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a green filter is understood to let green light pass), and the quantum- dot layer converts a wavelength of light from the first-color emission layer (see Fig. 6c) or light from the second-color emission layer into a wavelength of light which the third color filter layer allows to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a red filter is understood to let red light pass)”.
With respect to claim 12: Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the third color filter layer allows red light to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5)”.
With respect to claim 13: Joo teaches “a display apparatus (DP) comprising: a first substrate (BS1); first to third light-emitting elements (OLEDs in PXA-R1, PXA-G1, PXA-B1) disposed over the first substrate (see Fig. 4) and each including a first-color emission layer (EML); an encapsulation layer covering the first to third light-emitting elements (CL); a bank (DML) disposed on the encapsulation layer (see Figs. 4, 5), wherein first to third bank openings (OP1, OP2, OP3) are defined through the bank to respectively overlap the first to third light-emitting elements when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the first substrate(see Fig. 5); a quantum-dot layer (CCF-R) disposed in the third bank opening to overlap the third light- emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Figs. 4, 5); a spacer disposed on the bank (DM-C) and including a same material as a material of the quantum-dot layer *see Fig. 7); a second substrate (BS2) disposed over the first substrate (see Fig. 4) with the bank and the spacer therebetween (see Figs. 4, 7); a first color filter layer (CF-B) disposed on a lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and overlapping the first light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); a second color filter layer (CF-G) disposed on the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and overlapping the second light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5); and a third color filter layer (CF-R) disposed on the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and overlapping the third light-emitting element when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 5)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “a second-color emission layer”.
However, Park teaches a display apparatus in which light emitting elements (Rp, Gp, Bp, Wp) have two or more color emission layers (142, 144, 146).
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the additional color emission layers of Park in order to realize excellent efficiency, maintain a color characteristic, and enable the simplification of a process and the saving of the manufacturing cost (Park paragraph 11).
With respect to claim 14: Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 13 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the quantum-dot layer includes a concave portion (part of CCF-R that is not DM-C) and a protrusion (DM-C), the concave portion is disposed in the third bank opening of the bank (see Fig. 7), and the protrusion is disposed on a surface of the bank facing the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 15: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 14 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the protrusion and the concave portion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 21: Joo teaches “Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 13 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the bank does not include a liquid repellent or hydrophobic material (paragraphs 129, 101)”.
With respect to claim 22: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 13 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the first color filter layer allows light from the first-color emission layer to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a blue filter is understood to let blue light pass), the second color filter layer allows light from the second-color emission layer to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a green filter is understood to let green light pass), and the quantum- dot layer converts a wavelength of light from the first-color emission layer (see Fig. 6c) or light from the second-color emission layer into a wavelength of light which the third color filter layer allows to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5; a red filter is understood to let red light pass)”.
With respect to claim 23: Joo in view of Park teaches “The display apparatus of claim 113 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the third color filter layer allows red light to pass therethrough (see Fig. 5)”.
With respect to claim 24: Joo teaches “a method of manufacturing a display apparatus (method of making DP), the method comprising: providing first to third light-emitting elements (OLEDs in PXA-R1, PXA-G1, PXA-B1) over a first substrate (BS1), wherein each of the first to third light-emitting elements includes a first-color emission layer (EML); providing a bank (DML), through which first to third bank openings (OP1, OP2, OP3) are formed to respectively overlap the first to third light-emitting elements (see Fig. 5); and simultaneously (see Fig. 7) forming a quantum-dot layer (CFF-R) and a spacer (DM-C), wherein the quantum- dot layer is provided in the third bank opening and the spacer is provided on the bank (see Fig. 7)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “a second-color emission layer”.
However, Park teaches a display apparatus in which light emitting elements (Rp, Gp, Bp, Wp) have two or more color emission layers (142, 144, 146).
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of making the display apparatus of Joo with the additional color emission layers of Park in order to realize excellent efficiency, maintain a color characteristic, and enable the simplification of a process and the saving of the manufacturing cost (Park paragraph 11).
With respect to claim 25: Joo in view of Park teaches “the method of claim 24 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “further comprising: providing a first color filter layer (CF-B) on a second substrate to overlap the first light- emitting element (see Fig. 5); providing a second color filter layer (CF-G) on the second substrate to overlap the second light-emitting element (see Fig. 5); and providing a third color filter layer (CF-B) on the second substrate to overlap the third light- emitting element (see Fig. 5), wherein the providing the bank includes forming the bank on the first to third color filter layers (see Figs. 5, 7)”.
With respect to claim 26: Joo in view of Park teaches “the method of claim 25 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the quantum-dot layer includes a concave portion (part of CCF-R that is not DM-C) and a protrusion (DM-C), the concave portion is disposed in the third bank opening of the bank (see Fig. 7), and the protrusion is disposed on a surface of the bank facing the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 27: Joo in view of Park teaches “The method of claim 26 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the protrusion and the concave portion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
Claims 4-6, 16-18, 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo in view of Park as applied to claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 24, 25 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (US 20190162993 A1).
With respect to claim 4: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 2 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the spacer facing the first substrate is greater than a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the protrusion facing the first substrate”.
Joo’s protrusion is used as a spacer, so the difference in distance between the spacer and the protrusion would mean that different protrusions have different heights.
Hong teaches a display with plurality of protrusions (640, 630, 620, 610) of which protrusions 630, 640 extend further towards the first substrate than protrusions 620, 610.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo by extending some protrusions (‘spacers’) further than others from the surface of the second substrate as taught by Hong in order to suppress the occurrence of defects at the edges of the display (Hong paragraphs 138-143).
With respect to claim 5: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the display apparatus of claim 4 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer and the protrusion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 6: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the display apparatus of claim 4 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer is apart from the quantum-dot layer when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 16: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 14 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the spacer facing the first substrate is greater than a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the protrusion facing the first substrate”.
Joo’s protrusion is used as a spacer, so the difference in distance between the spacer and the protrusion would mean that different protrusions have different heights.
Hong teaches a display with plurality of protrusions (640, 630, 620, 610) of which protrusions 630, 640 extend further towards the first substrate than protrusions 620, 610.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo by extending some protrusions (‘spacers’) further than others from the surface of the second substrate as taught by Hong in order to suppress the occurrence of defects at the edges of the display (Hong paragraphs 138-143).
With respect to claim 17: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the display apparatus of claim 16 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer and the protrusion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 18: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the display apparatus of claim 16 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer is apart from the quantum-dot layer when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 28: Joo in view of Park teaches “The method of claim 26 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the spacer facing the first substrate is greater than a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the protrusion facing the first substrate”.
Joo’s protrusion is used as a spacer, so the difference in distance between the spacer and the protrusion would mean that different protrusions have different heights.
Hong teaches a display with plurality of protrusions (640, 630, 620, 610) of which protrusions 630, 640 extend further towards the first substrate than protrusions 620, 610.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of making the display apparatus of Joo by extending some protrusions (‘spacers’) further than others from the surface of the second substrate as taught by Hong in order to suppress the occurrence of defects at the edges of the display (Hong paragraphs 138-143).
With respect to claim 29: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the method of claim 28 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer and the protrusion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 30: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the method of claim 28 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer is apart from the quantum-dot layer when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
Claims 7-8, 19, 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo in view of Park as applied to claims 1, 13, 24 above, and further in view of Joo et al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo II.
With respect to claim 7: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “a first inorganic layer disposed between the first to third color filter layers and the bank; and a second inorganic layer covering a portion of the lower surface of the bank facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the quantum dot layer facing the first substrate, wherein the portion of the lower surface of the bank is outside the quantum dot layer and the spacer”.
However, Joo II teaches “a first inorganic layer (730) disposed between the first to third color filter layers (CF1, CF2, CRF3) and the bank (210); and a second inorganic layer (710) covering a portion of the lower surface of the bank (see Fig. 5) facing the first substrate (100) and a lower surface of the quantum dot layer (QD1, QD2) facing the first substrate (see Fig. 5), wherein the portion of the lower surface of the bank (the part of 213 covered by 710) is outside (see Fig. 5) the quantum dot layer (QD1, QD2) and the spacer (CS)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the inorganic layers of Joo II in order to protect against contamination (Joo II paragraph 151).
With respect to claim 8: Joo in view of Park and Joo II teaches “The display apparatus of claim 7 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein the second inorganic layer contacts the first inorganic layer in the first bank opening and in the second bank opening”.
However, Joo II teaches “wherein the second inorganic layer contacts the first inorganic layer in the first bank opening and in the second bank opening (paragraph 150; when the transmission layer TW is omitted the inorganic layers would contact each other in each bank opening of type P3)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the inorganic layers of Joo II in order to protect against contamination (Joo II paragraph 151) and to allow them to contact each other in any pixel in which the layer that would be in between them is not needed and thus can be removed (Joo II paragraph 150).
With respect to claim 19: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 13 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “a first inorganic layer disposed between the first to third color filter layers and the bank; and a second inorganic layer covering a portion of the lower surface of the bank facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the quantum dot layer facing the first substrate, wherein the portion of the lower surface of the bank is outside the quantum dot layer and the spacer”.
However, Joo II teaches “a first inorganic layer (730) disposed between the first to third color filter layers (CF1, CF2, CRF3) and the bank (210); and a second inorganic layer (710) covering a portion of the lower surface of the bank (see Fig. 5) facing the first substrate (100) and a lower surface of the quantum dot layer (QD1, QD2) facing the first substrate (see Fig. 5), wherein the portion of the lower surface of the bank (the part of 213 covered by 710) is outside (see Fig. 5) the quantum dot layer (QD1, QD2) and the spacer (CS)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the inorganic layers of Joo II in order to protect against contamination (Joo II paragraph 151).
With respect to claim 31: Joo in view of Park teaches “The method of claim 24 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “further comprising: providing an encapsulation layer to cover the first to third light-emitting elements, wherein the providing the bank includes forming the bank on the encapsulation layer”.
However, Joo II teaches “providing an encapsulation layer (400) to cover the first to third light-emitting elements (OLED; see Fig. 5), wherein the providing the bank includes forming the bank on the encapsulation layer (see Fig. 5)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the encapsulation layer of Joo II in order to protect the light emitting elements (Joo II paragraph 113).
With respect to claim 32: Joo in view of Park and Joo II teaches “The method of claim 31 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the quantum-dot layer includes a concave portion (part of CCF-R that is not DM-C) and a protrusion (DM-C), the concave portion is disposed in the third bank opening of the bank (see Fig. 7), and the protrusion is disposed on a surface of the bank facing the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 33: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 32 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the protrusion and the concave portion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
Claims 9, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo in view of Park as applied to claims 1, 13 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 20110042697 A1).
With respect to claim 9: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 1 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “the quantum-dot layer (see Fig. 6c) includes scatterers (OL)”.
Joo does not specifically teach first color filter layer and the second color filter layer also include scatterers.
However, Lee teaches wherein each of the first color filter layer (231) and the second color filter layer (232) includes scatterers (235)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the scatterers of Lee in order to improve light extraction efficiency from the color filters (Lee paragraph 92).
With respect to claim 20: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 13 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “the quantum-dot layer (see Fig. 6c) includes scatterers (OL)”.
Joo does not specifically teach first color filter layer and the second color filter layer also include scatterers.
However, Lee teaches wherein each of the first color filter layer (231) and the second color filter layer (232) includes scatterers (235)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo with the scatterers of Lee in order to improve light extraction efficiency from the color filters (Lee paragraph 92).
Claims 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo in view of Park and Joo II as applied to claims 24, 33 above, and further in view of Hong.
With respect to claim 34: Joo in view of Park and Joo II teaches “The method of claim 32 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the spacer facing the first substrate is greater than a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the protrusion facing the first substrate”.
Joo’s protrusion is used as a spacer, so the difference in distance between the spacer and the protrusion would mean that different protrusions have different heights.
Hong teaches a display with plurality of protrusions (640, 630, 620, 610) of which protrusions 630, 640 extend further towards the first substrate than protrusions 620, 610.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo by extending some protrusions (‘spacers’) further than others from the surface of the second substrate as taught by Hong in order to suppress the occurrence of defects at the edges of the display (Hong paragraphs 138-143).
With respect to claim 35: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the method of claim 34 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer and the protrusion are integrally formed as a single unitary and indivisible body (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 36: Joo in view of Park and Hong teaches “the method of claim 43 (see above)”.
Joo further teaches “wherein the spacer is apart from the quantum-dot layer when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the first substrate (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 16: Joo in view of Park teaches “the display apparatus of claim 14 (see above)”.
Joo does not specifically teach “wherein a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the spacer facing the first substrate is greater than a distance between the lower surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate and a lower surface of the protrusion facing the first substrate”.
Joo’s protrusion is used as a spacer, so the difference in distance between the spacer and the protrusion would mean that different protrusions have different heights.
Hong teaches a display with plurality of protrusions (640, 630, 620, 610) of which protrusions 630, 640 extend further towards the first substrate than protrusions 620, 610.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display apparatus of Joo by extending some protrusions (‘spacers’) further than others from the surface of the second substrate as taught by Hong in order to suppress the occurrence of defects at the edges of the display (Hong paragraphs 138-143).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tang (US 9897912 B2), which teaches a method of making a color filter.
Kim et al. (US 20200266243 A1), which teaches a display device.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL J. LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5721. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 EST M-F.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at (571)270-5046. 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.
/NATHANIEL J LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875