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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed 2/11/2026 has been received and entered into the record. As a result, claims 1, 6, 7, 9-17, 19, and 20 have been amended and claim 2 has been canceled. Therefore, claims 1 and 3-20 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 8, 10, 16, 18, and 19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-14 of copending Application No. 18/244,199 (reference application) in view of Lu et al. [U.S. Pub. 2022/0076931]. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as demonstrated below.
Instant Application
Application 18/244,199
1. A method comprising:
identifying property data associated with a substrate support system;
1. A method comprising:
identifying property data associated with a substrate support system;
identifying target performance data associated with the substrate support system; and
identifying target performance data associated with the substrate support system;
causing, based on the property data and the target performance data,
determining, based on the property data and the target performance data,
performance of one or more material operations on the substrate support system comprising one or more of:
zone configuration data associated with the substrate support system; and
material addition to the substrate support system; or
surface corrugating of the substrate support system.
causing the substrate support system to be configured based on the zone configuration data.
Where Lu et al. teaches surface corrugating of the substrate support system [par. 0078]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Lu's teachings of surface corrugating of the substrate support system for the benefit of increasing heat transfer efficiency.
3.
2.
4.
6.
5.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
10.
10.
16.
1.
18.
8.
19.
1.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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, 3-5, 7-9, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cimino et al. [U.S. Pub. 2021/0022212] ("Cimino") in view of Barriss et al. [U.S. Pub. 2015/0075431] ("Barriss").
With regard to claim 1, Cimino teaches a method comprising:
identifying property data associated with a substrate support system [fig. 1: Processing Chamber (100) and Substrate Support Assembly (126)] ("At block 1330, the real-time temperature feedback data is provided as an input to a closed-loop process control algorithm. Examples of process control algorithms have been discussed with reference to FIGS. 10-12 [par. 0085]");
identifying target performance data associated with the substrate support system ("At block 1340, targeted value of heater temperature for each heating zone is provided as another input to the closed-loop process control algorithm. The targeted value of heater temperature is calculated by a model, such as a wafer-temperature-to-heater temperature model. The wafer temperature is a function of process parameters, such as showerhead temperature, chamber pressure, distance of the heater from the showerhead etc., as shown in FIGS. 6, 7, and 10 [par. 0086]"); and
causing, based on the property data and the target performance data, performance of ("At block 1360, chamber hardware is controlled to match the targeted value of heater temperature that is correlated with optimum values of process parameters [par. 0088]" and "The closed-loop heater temperature control algorithm 1114 outputs targeted heater power 1116 based on the targeted heater temperature 110 and the heater temperature feedback 1108, which is communicated to heater electronics 1118 to achieve independent control of a heating zone [par. 0076]").
Cimino does not explicitly teach performance of one or more material operations on the substrate support system comprising one or more of: material addition to a substrate support system; or surface corrugating of the substrate support system.
In an analogous art (support apparatus temperature control), Barriss teaches performance of one or more material operations on a substrate support system comprising one or more of: material addition to a substrate support system ("The substrate carriers 500 can be modified by removing material in predetermined areas, or by adding material in predetermined areas, or any combination of removing and adding materials in various predetermined areas [par. 0078]"); or surface corrugating of the substrate support system.
Barriss further teaches, "the substrate carrier is fabricated or modified to provide a predetermined temperature profile over the substrate being supported by the substrate carrier [par. 0076]" and "[t]he resulting data obtained from the measurement and analysis is then used to modify the substrate carrier, or to fabricate a new substrate carrier with specifications that compensate for non-uniform process parameters associated with the substrate, such as temperature and/or gas phase non-uniformities, due to non-uniformities in the processing system [par. 0077]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Barriss' teachings of adding material to a support system, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of compensating for non-uniformities in the processing system.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 3, the combination above teaches the method of claim 1. Cimino in the combination further teaches wherein the property data comprises one or more of:
sensor data received from one or more sensors associated with the substrate support system ("The substrate support 132 and/or heater assembly 170 may include a plurality of temperature sensors for providing temperature feedback information [par. 0046]"); or
simulated data associated with the substrate support system.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 4, the combination above teaches the method of claim 1. Cimino in the combination further teaches wherein the property data comprises one or more of:
measurement data of one or more components of the substrate support system ("Each temperature sensor may be located proximate to one of the spatially tunable heaters and may be used to determine an operability of the nearby spatially tunable heater [par. 0046]"); or
processing chamber data of a processing chamber, the substrate support system being disposed in the processing chamber, the processing chamber data comprising one or more of flow rate data associated with process gas flowing into the processing chamber, venting port location data associated with a venting port of the processing chamber, or pressure data associated with pressure of the processing chamber.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 5, the combination above teaches the method of claim 1. Cimino in the combination further teaches wherein the target performance data comprises one or more of
a target heat map ("The targeted heater temperature 1110 comprises a separate target temperature for each of the zones of the substrate support. This allows the closed-loop heater temperature controller 1114 to achieve the desired temperature pattern on the substrate 1102 [par. 0076]"), a target etch map, or a target deposition map associated with an upper surface of the substrate support system.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 7, the combination above teaches the method of claim 1. Cimino in the combination teaches the method further comprising:
providing the property data and the target performance data as input to a trained machine learning model ("The closed-loop heater temperature control algorithm 1114 outputs targeted heater power 1116 based on the targeted heater temperature 110 and the heater temperature feedback 1108, which is communicated to heater electronics 1118 to achieve independent control of a heating zone. The generation of the model can be done using machine learning algorithm, as described earlier in the disclosure [par. 0076]" and "input data for the trained machine learning model or models [par. 0072]");
obtaining, from the trained machine learning model, output associated with predictive data ("real-time RTD data may be used to train the models to improve accuracy of predicted results [par. 0070]" and "At block 1350, the algorithm outputs targeted value of heater power [par. 0087]"); and
determining, based on the predictive data, the one or more material operations to perform on the substrate support system to meet the target performance data ("At block 1360, chamber hardware is controlled to match the targeted value of heater temperature that is correlated with optimum values of process parameters [par. 0088];" where Barriss in the combination teaches the material operation on the substrate support system: "the substrate carrier is fabricated or modified to provide a predetermined temperature profile over the substrate being supported by the substrate carrier [par. 0076]" and "[t]he resulting data obtained from the measurement and analysis is then used to modify the substrate carrier, or to fabricate a new substrate carrier with specifications that compensate for non-uniform process parameters associated with the substrate, such as temperature and/or gas phase non-uniformities, due to non-uniformities in the processing system [par. 0077]").
With regard to claim 8, the combination above teaches the method of claim 7. Cimino in the combination further teaches the trained machine learning model being trained based on
data input comprising historical property data and historical target performance data of historical substrate support systems ("real-time RTD data may be used to train the models to improve accuracy of predicted results, but historical trustworthy data representing heater temperature may be used to build the model. Other inputs to the models comprise various process parameters [par. 0070]" and "a machine learning algorithm training such models based available data collected from the chamber for different chamber configurations (that is, for different showerhead temperature, chamber pressure, distance to showerhead, heat-exchanger power and heater power) [par. 0072]" and and) and
target output comprising historical material operations on the historical substrate support systems ("The optimum values of prosed parameters may be the historical parameters corresponding to the best known method (BKM) [par. 0088]" and "the model is trained with historical chamber data using a machine-learning algorithm [claim 10];" where Barriss in the combination teaches the material operation on the substrate support system: "the substrate carrier is fabricated or modified to provide a predetermined temperature profile over the substrate being supported by the substrate carrier [par. 0076]" and "[t]he resulting data obtained from the measurement and analysis is then used to modify the substrate carrier, or to fabricate a new substrate carrier with specifications that compensate for non-uniform process parameters associated with the substrate, such as temperature and/or gas phase non-uniformities, due to non-uniformities in the processing system [par. 0077]").
With regard to claim 9, the combination above teaches the method of claim 1. Barriss in the combination further teaches wherein the one or more material operations form intentional asymmetric features in the substrate support system ("Even if the temperature is completely uniform over the substrate, there still could be significant variations in the emission wavelength due to gas phase depletion or compositional differences within the deposition chamber. Therefore, it is sometimes desirable to intentionally induce a temperature non-uniformity to compensate for gas phase and other non-uniformity [par. 0075]" and "The substrate carriers 500 can be modified by removing material in predetermined areas, or by adding material in predetermined areas, or any combination of removing and adding materials in various predetermined areas [par. 0078]").
With regard to claim 16, the combination above teaches claim 1. Claim 16 recites limitations having the same scope as those pertaining to claim 1; therefore, claim 16 is rejected along the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 16 differs from claim 1 where claim 16 recites the additional elements (which Cimino teaches): a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium storing instructions which, when executed cause a processing device to perform operations ("The instructions 1426 can also reside, completely or at least partially, within the main memory 1404 and/or within the processing device 1402 during execution thereof by the computer system 1400, the main memory 1404 and the processing device 1402 also constituting machine-readable storage media [par. 0094]").
With regard to claim 18, the combination above teaches claim 7. Claim 18 recites limitations having the same scopes as those pertaining to claim 7; therefore, claim 18 is rejected along the same grounds as claim 7.
With regard to claim 19, the combination above teaches claim 1. Claim 19 recites limitations having the same scope as those pertaining to claim 1; therefore, claim 19 is rejected along the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 19 differs from claim 1 where claim 19 recites the additional elements (which Cimino teaches): a memory; a processing device coupled to the memory ("The instructions 1426 can also reside, completely or at least partially, within the main memory 1404 and/or within the processing device 1402 during execution thereof by the computer system 1400, the main memory 1404 and the processing device 1402 also constituting machine-readable storage media [par. 0094]").
Claims 6, 10-12, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cimino in view of Barriss further in view of Lu et al. [U.S. Pub. 2022/0076931] ("Lu").
With regard to claim 6, the combination of Cimino and Barriss teaches the method of claim 1. Barriss in in the combination further teaches wherein the performance of the one or more material operations comprise:
the material addition to the substrate support system ("The substrate carriers 500 can be modified by removing material in predetermined areas, or by adding material in predetermined areas, or any combination of removing and adding materials in various predetermined areas [par. 0078]")
The combination does not explicitly teach the surface corrugating of the substrate support system.
In an analogous art (support apparatus temperature control), Lu teaches a surface corrugating of a substrate support system ("The center plate 111 may include an upper cooling channel 121 and a lower cooling channel 123 that are symmetrical in the vertical direction, e.g., with respect to a horizontal plane, and may include a plurality of first fin portions 117 protruding from an inner wall of the upper cooling channel 121 and a plurality of second fin portions 118 protruding from an inner wall of the lower cooling channel 123 [par. 0078]").
Lu further teaches, "Since a contact area between a coolant and the substrate support chuck 110b is increased by the first fin portion 117 and the second fin portion 118, the heat transfer efficiency between the coolant and the substrate support chuck 110 may be improved [par. 0076]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Lu's teachings of a modified cooling channels, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of increasing heat transfer efficiency.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 10, the combination of Cimino and Barriss teaches the method of claim 1. Cimino in the combination teaches wherein the substrate support system comprises:
a ("The substrate support 132 may be a vacuum chuck, an electrostatic chuck (ESC) or other workpiece support surface [par. 0035]") that one or more of:
houses a clamp electrode;
houses heaters ("The substrate support assembly 126 may additionally include a heater assembly 170 that includes main resistive heating elements 154 [par. 0035]"); or
forms gas channels;
a cooling plate forming cooling channels and gas channels ("The chiller/heat-exchanger 144 provides a heat transfer fluid, such as a liquid, gas or combination thereof, which is circulated through one or more conduits 160 disposed in the cooling base 130 [par. 0040]"); and
("the substrate support 132 disposed directly on the cooling base 130 [par. 0045]").
Cimino does not explicitly teach the puck being ceramic or a bonding material coupling the puck to the cooling plate.
However, it is old and well known in the art at a puck is made of ceramic and that a bonding material is used to couple a puck to a cooling plate.
In an analogous art (support apparatus temperature control), Lu teaches a ceramic puck ("The electrostatic dielectric layer 1150 may be comprised of a dielectric such as a ceramic [par. 0093]") and a bonding material coupling the ceramic puck to a cooling plate ("the substrate support chuck 1100 may include a base 1110, a heater dielectric layer 1140 bonded to the base 1110 by an adhesive layer 1130 [par. 0086]").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have utilized a ceramic puck and a bonding material for the benefit of providing desired thermal conductive properties.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 11, the combination above teaches the method of claim 10. Lu in the combination teaches wherein the performance of the one or more material operations comprise forming protrusions on the cooling plate ("The center plate 111 may include an upper cooling channel 121 and a lower cooling channel 123 that are symmetrical in the vertical direction, e.g., with respect to a horizontal plane, and may include a plurality of first fin portions 117 protruding from an inner wall of the upper cooling channel 121 and a plurality of second fin portions 118 protruding from an inner wall of the lower cooling channel 123 [par. 0078]").
Lu further teaches, "Since a contact area between a coolant and the substrate support chuck 110b is increased by the first fin portion 117 and the second fin portion 118, the heat transfer efficiency between the coolant and the substrate support chuck 110 may be improved [par. 0076]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Lu's teachings of protrusions on a cooling plate, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of increasing heat transfer efficiency.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 12, the combination above teaches the method of claim 10. Lu in the combination further teaches wherein the surface corrugating comprises corrugating the cooling channels to be configured to cause perturbation of fluid flow to modulate heat transfer efficiency ("The center plate 111 may include an upper cooling channel 121 and a lower cooling channel 123 that are symmetrical in the vertical direction, e.g., with respect to a horizontal plane, and may include a plurality of first fin portions 117 protruding from an inner wall of the upper cooling channel 121 and a plurality of second fin portions 118 protruding from an inner wall of the lower cooling channel 123 [par. 0078]" Note: the limitation "to modulate heat transfer efficiency" is drawn to intended use of the claimed of the claimed feature and does not structurally define the claimed invention over the prior art. See MPEP §2114).
Lu further teaches, "Since a contact area between a coolant and the substrate support chuck 110b is increased by the first fin portion 117 and the second fin portion 118, the heat transfer efficiency between the coolant and the substrate support chuck 110 may be improved [par. 0076]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Lu's teachings of a modified cooling channels, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of increasing heat transfer efficiency.
With regard to claim 15, the combination above teaches the method of claim 10.
Lu in the combination further teaches teaches wherein the performance of the one or more material operations comprise causing cooling channels to be one or more of:
a fin ("The center plate 111 may include an upper cooling channel 121 and a lower cooling channel 123 that are symmetrical in the vertical direction, e.g., with respect to a horizontal plane, and may include a plurality of first fin portions 117 protruding from an inner wall of the upper cooling channel 121 and a plurality of second fin portions 118 protruding from an inner wall of the lower cooling channel 123 [par. 0078]"); stepwise approximation to represent a circular channel; a circular channel; stacked; or computer-generated regenerative channels.
Lu further teaches, "Since a contact area between a coolant and the substrate support chuck 110b is increased by the first fin portion 117 and the second fin portion 118, the heat transfer efficiency between the coolant and the substrate support chuck 110 may be improved [par. 0076]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Lu's teachings of a modified cooling channels, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of increasing heat transfer efficiency.
With regard to claim 17, the combination above teaches claim 6. Claim 17 recites limitations having the same scopes as those pertaining to claim 6; therefore, claim 17 is rejected along the same grounds as claim 6.
With regard to claim 20, the combination above teaches claim 6. Claim 20 recites limitations having the same scopes as those pertaining to claim 6; therefore, claim 20 is rejected along the same grounds as claim 6.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cimino in view of Barriss in view of Lu further in view of Parkhe et al. [U.S. Pub. 2015/0129165] ("Parkhe").
With regard to claim 13, the combination of Cimino, Barriss, and Lu teaches the method of claim 10. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the performance of the one or more material operations comprise causing the gas channels to one or more of have a variable gas channel width, have a variable gas channel height, or be configured to flow different gas composition types.
In an analogous art (tuning support assembly), Parkhe teaches where a performance of one or more material operations comprise causing gas channels to one or more of have a variable gas channel width ("The relative size of the orifices 412 may be selected to determine the relative amount of heat transfer fluid provide to each individual cell 200, thereby enabling the lateral temperature profile of the substrate 134 to be tuned. For example, a first orifice 4121 may have a first diameter that controls the flow of heat transfer fluid from the inlet plenum 402 to the first cell 2001, while a second orifice 4222 may have a second diameter (different than the first diameter) that controls the flow of heat transfer fluid from the inlet plenum 402 to the second cell 2002 at a rate different than the rate provide to the first cell 2001, and so on for the rest of the cells 200 of the cooling base 430 [par. 0057]"), have a variable gas channel height, or be configured to flow different gas composition types.
Parkhe further teaches, "Implementations described herein provide a pixelated substrate support assembly which enables both lateral and azimuthal tuning of the heat transfer between an electrostatic chuck and a cooling base comprising the substrate support assembly, which in turn, allows both lateral and azimuthal tuning of a substrate processed on the substrate support assembly [par. 0009]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Parkhe's teachings of a modified cooling plate, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of achieving greater temperature uniformity.
Note: claim is presented in the alternative.
With regard to claim 14, the combination of Cimino, Barriss, and Lu teaches the method of claim 10. The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the performance of the one or more material operations comprise causing the gas channels to be multi-zone gas channels passing through the cooling plate, the bonding material, and the ceramic puck.
In an analogous art (tuning support assembly), Parkhe teaches wherein performance of one or more material operations comprise causing gas channels to be multi-zone gas channels passing through the cooling plate, the bonding material, and the ceramic puck ("The heat transfer fluid source 144 provides a heat transfer fluid, such as a liquid, gas or combination thereof, which is independently circulated in a plurality of pixel cells [par. 0032]" and "allows the heat transfer between the electrostatic chuck 134 and the cooling base 130 to be locally and independently controlled through each individual web 264 with little influence from the rate of heat transfer occurring at neighboring or other webs 264 distributed across the cooling base 130. Thus, by individually and independently controlling the heat transfer through each web 264, pixel by pixel approach to temperature control can be realized which enables specific points of the substrate to be heated or cool, thus allowing truly addressable lateral temperature profile tuning and control [par. 0039]").
Parkhe further teaches, "Implementations described herein provide a pixelated substrate support assembly which enables both lateral and azimuthal tuning of the heat transfer between an electrostatic chuck and a cooling base comprising the substrate support assembly, which in turn, allows both lateral and azimuthal tuning of a substrate processed on the substrate support assembly [par. 0009]."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have included Parkhe's teachings of a modified cooling plate, with the teachings of Cimino, for the benefit of achieving greater temperature uniformity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 16, and 19 have been considered but are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendment.
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 VINCENT W CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1214. The examiner can normally be reached (M-F) 10:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at 571-272-4105. 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.
/VINCENT WEN-LIANG CHANG/
Examiner
Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119