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 .
Summary
This is a non-final office action for application 18/249,901 filed on 04/20/2023. Claims 1-11 and 16-17 are pending. Acknowledgment is made to the cancelation of claims 12-15 in the response to restriction filed on 12/29/2025.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies have been filed in parent Application Nos. JP2020-179194 filed on 10/26/2020, JP2020-186852 filed on 11/09/2020, JP2020-191054 filed on 11/17/2020 and PCT/IB2021/059382 filed on 10/13/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS)s submitted on 07/19/2023, 08/08/2023, 09/09/2025 and 01/13/2026 are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hong et al. (US-20160164078-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises a second composite oxide represented by LiFePO4 (see e.g. " LiFePO4 having an average particle size of about 800 nm as a shell forming material" in paragraph [0089]).
Regarding Claim 4, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises an aluminum oxide (see e.g. "Also, to improve coating performance of the shell on the core, metal oxide may be further included in the shell. The metal oxide may be... aluminum oxide." in paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 7, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material, wherein the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises a second composite oxide represented by LiFePO4 (see e.g. " LiFePO4 having an average particle size of about 800 nm as a shell forming material" in paragraph [0089]).
Regarding Claim 8, Hong discloses a secondary battery (see e.g. "a lithium secondary battery" in paragraph [0021]) comprising the positive electrode according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 9-11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US-20160164078-A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Kumar et al. (US-20100086854-A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises a second composite oxide represented LiFePO4 (see e.g. " LiFePO4 having an average particle size of about 800 nm as a shell forming material" in paragraph [0089]).
Hong does not disclose that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel.
Kumar, however, in the same field of endeavor, fluorine doped lithium rich metal oxide positive electrode battery materials, discloses a first material that comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel (see e.g. "Li1+xNiαMnβCoγAδO2-zFz ... where A is Mg, Zn, Al, Ga, B, Zr, Ti, Ca, Ce, Y, Nb or combinations thereof" in paragraphs [0005] and [0011] of Kumar; if A is Mg and Al this material becomes Li1+xNiαMnβCoγMgδ/2Alδ/2 O2-zFz which is a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel).
Kumar also teaches that the lithium rich metal oxyfluoride compositions have been selected to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties. In particular, the compositions have been selected to provide a high specific capacity that is stable over a significant number of charge-discharge cycles, and the materials provide good performance at higher discharge rates (see e.g. paragraph [0031] of Kumar). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first material comprising a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) of Hong et al. such that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar et al. in order to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties as suggested by Kumar.
Regarding Claim 3, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises a second composite oxide represented LiFePO4 (see e.g. " LiFePO4 having an average particle size of about 800 nm as a shell forming material" in paragraph [0089]).
Hong does not disclose that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel, wherein a surface portion of the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a region with the highest concentrations of the magnesium, the fluorine, and the aluminum,
Kumar, however, in the same field of endeavor, fluorine doped lithium rich metal oxide positive electrode battery materials, discloses a first material that comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel (see e.g. " Li1+xNiαMnβCoγAδO2-zFz ... where A is Mg, Zn, Al, Ga, B, Zr, Ti, Ca, Ce, Y, Nb or combinations thereof" in paragraphs [0005] and [0011] of Kumar; if A is Mg and Al this material becomes Li1+xNiαMnβCoγMgδ/2Alδ/2 O2-zFz which is a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel).
Kumar also teaches that the lithium rich metal oxyfluoride compositions have been selected to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties. In particular, the compositions have been selected to provide a high specific capacity that is stable over a significant number of charge-discharge cycles, and the materials provide good performance at higher discharge rates (see e.g. paragraph [0031] of Kumar). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first material comprising a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) of Hong et al. such that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar et al. in order to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties as suggested by Kumar.
Kumar does not explicitly disclose that a surface portion of the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a region with the highest concentrations of the magnesium, the fluorine, and the aluminum.
Kumar, however, further teaches that materials doped using a low temperature process exhibit characteristics indicative of surface doping rather than bulk doping (see e.g. paragraph [0045] of Kumar). Kumar explains that such surface doping is associated with improved cycling stability and improved high-rate performance. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood that surface doping results in a concentration gradient in which dopant elements are present at higher concentrations at or near the surface of the lithium cobalt oxide particles relative to the interior thereof.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar such that a surface portion of the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a region having the highest concentrations of magnesium, fluorine, and aluminum, relative to other regions of the particle in order to improve cycling stability and discharge rate performance as suggested by Kumar.
Regarding Claim 5, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises an aluminum oxide (see e.g. "Also, to improve coating performance of the shell on the core, metal oxide may be further included in the shell. The metal oxide may be... aluminum oxide." in paragraph [0063]).
Hong does not disclose that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel.
Kumar, however, discloses a first material that comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel (see e.g. "Li1+xNiαMnβCoγAδO2-zFz ... where A is Mg, Zn, Al, Ga, B, Zr, Ti, Ca, Ce, Y, Nb or combinations thereof" in paragraphs [0005] and [0011] of Kumar; if A is Mg and Al this material becomes Li1+xNiαMnβCoγMgδ/2Alδ/2 O2-zFz which is a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel).
Kumar also teaches that the lithium rich metal oxyfluoride compositions have been selected to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties. In particular, the compositions have been selected to provide a high specific capacity that is stable over a significant number of charge-discharge cycles, and the materials provide good performance at higher discharge rates (see e.g. paragraph [0031] of Kumar). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first material comprising a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) of Hong et al. such that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar et al. in order to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties as suggested by Kumar.
Regarding Claim 6, Hong discloses a positive electrode (see e.g. "cathode" in paragraph [0046]) comprising a first material and a second material covering at least part of a surface of the first material (see e.g. "an electrode active material including a core formed from one selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxide, a carbon material, a lithium metal, and a metal compound, or mixtures thereof, and a shell formed on a surface of the core and including lithium metal oxide particles and polymer" in paragraph [0009]; the core is the first material and the shell is the second material),
wherein the first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMnO2" in paragraph [0010]), and
wherein the second material comprises an aluminum oxide (see e.g. "Also, to improve coating performance of the shell on the core, metal oxide may be further included in the shell. The metal oxide may be... aluminum oxide." in paragraph [0063]).
Hong does not disclose that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel.
Kumar, however, discloses a first material that comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel (see e.g. " Li1+xNiαMnβCoγAδO2-zFz ... where A is Mg, Zn, Al, Ga, B, Zr, Ti, Ca, Ce, Y, Nb or combinations thereof" in paragraphs [0005] and [0011] of Kumar; if A is Mg and Al this material becomes Li1+xNiαMnβCoγMgδ/2Alδ/2O2-zFz which is a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel).
Kumar also teaches that the lithium rich metal oxyfluoride compositions have been selected to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties. In particular, the compositions have been selected to provide a high specific capacity that is stable over a significant number of charge-discharge cycles, and the materials provide good performance at higher discharge rates (see e.g. paragraph [0031] of Kumar). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first material comprising a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 (M1 is one or more selected from Ni, Co and Mn) of Hong et al. such that the first material comprises a lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar et al. in order to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties as suggested by Kumar.
Kumar does not explicitly disclose that a surface portion of the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a region with the highest concentrations of the magnesium, the fluorine, and the aluminum.
Kumar, however, further teaches that materials doped using a low temperature process exhibit characteristics indicative of surface doping rather than bulk doping (see e.g. paragraph [0045] of Kumar). Kumar explains that such surface doping is associated with improved cycling stability and improved high-rate performance. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood that surface doping results in a concentration gradient in which dopant elements are present at higher concentrations at or near the surface of the lithium cobalt oxide particles relative to the interior thereof.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the lithium cobalt oxide comprising magnesium, fluorine, aluminum, and nickel as taught by Kumar such that a surface portion of the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a region having the highest concentrations of magnesium, fluorine, and aluminum, relative to other regions of the particle in order to improve cycling stability and discharge rate performance as suggested by Kumar.
Regarding Claim 9, Hong discloses the secondary battery according to claim 8 (see e.g. claim 8 rejection above).
Hong does not disclose a vehicle comprising the secondary battery.
Kumar, however, discloses that lithium ion secondary batteries are used in vehicles, including Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs), Electric Vehicles (EVs), and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) (see e.g. paragraph [0004] of Kumar).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ the secondary battery of Hong et al. in a vehicle as taught by Kumar et al., since lithium ion secondary batteries are well known for use as power sources in vehicles, and such use represents a predictable application of a known battery according to its established function of supplying electrical energy.
Regarding Claim 10, Hong discloses the secondary battery according to claim 8 (see e.g. claim 8 rejection above).
Hong does not disclose a power storage system comprising the secondary battery.
Kumar, however, discloses that secondary batteries are used in power storage systems for storing and supplying electrical energy (see e.g. paragraph [0004] of Kumar).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ the secondary battery of Hong et al. in a power storage system as taught by Kumar et al., since lithium ion secondary batteries are commonly used as power sources in power storage systems, and such use represents a predictable application of a known battery according to its established function of supplying electrical energy.
Regarding Claim 11, Hong discloses the secondary battery according to claim 8 (see e.g. claim 8 rejection above).
Hong does not disclose an electronic device comprising the secondary battery.
Kumar, however, discloses that lithium ion secondary batteries are used in electronic devices, such as cellular phones and laptop computers (see e.g. paragraph [0004] of Kumar).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ the secondary battery of Hong et al. in an electronic device as taught by Kumar et al., since lithium ion secondary batteries are commonly used as power sources in electronic devices, and such use represents a predictable application of a known battery according to its established function of supplying electrical energy.
Regarding Claim 17, Hong discloses the positive electrode according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Hong further discloses that M1 is Ni, Co and Mn (see e.g. "LiNixCoyMnzO2" in paragraph [0089]).
Hong does not disclose that M1 includes Al.
Kumar, however, discloses a first material comprises a first composite oxide represented by LiM1O2 where M1 is Ni, Co, Mn and Al (see e.g. " Li1+xNiαMnβCoγAδO2-zFz ... where A is Mg, Zn, Al, Ga, B, Zr, Ti, Ca, Ce, Y, Nb or combinations thereof" in paragraphs [0005] and [0011] of Kumar; if A is Al this material becomes Li1+xNiαMnβCoγMgδ/2Alδ/2 O2-zFz).
Kumar also teaches that the lithium rich metal oxyfluoride compositions have been selected to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties. In particular, the compositions have been selected to provide a high specific capacity that is stable over a significant number of charge-discharge cycles, and the materials provide good performance at higher discharge rates (see e.g. paragraph [0031] of Kumar). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first material comprising a first composite oxide represented by LiNixCoyMnzO2 of Hong et al. such that the first material comprises Ni, Co, Mn and Al as taught by Kumar et al. in order to provide desirable properties with respect to high specific capacity as well as excellent cycling properties as suggested by Kumar.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US-20160164078-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sasakawa et al. (US-20160190569-A1).
Regarding Claim 16, Hong discloses the positive electrode according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Hong further disclose that M1 is Co (see e.g. "the core may be any one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2"" in paragraph [0010]) and M2 is Fe (see e.g. " LiFePO4 having an average particle size of about 800 nm as a shell forming material" in paragraph [0089]).
Hong, however, does not disclose that M2 is Fe and Mn.
Sasakawa, however, in the same field of endeavor, positive electrode active materials with particles and coatings, discloses a coating layer represented by LiFe0.5Mn0.5PO4 (see e.g. Example 8 in Table 1 of Sasakawa).
Sasakawa also teaches that positive electrode active material coated with this material suppresses the deliquescence reaction and that the positive electrode active material is capable of improving the energy density and the charge and discharge cycle performance of a nonaqueous electrolyte battery (see e.g. paragraph [0097] of Sasakawa). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify second material of Hong et al. such that the second material is represented by LiFe0.5Mn0.5PO4 as taught by Sasakawa et al. in order to suppress the deliquescence reaction and provide a positive electrode active material that is capable of improving the energy density and the charge and discharge cycle performance of a nonaqueous electrolyte battery as suggested by Sasakawa.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Momma et al. (US-20210313571-A1)
Choi et al. (US-20160276659-A1)
Zhang et al. (US-20160028081-A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 pm EST.
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, TONG GUO can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/J.J.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/TONG GUO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723