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
The Amendments to the Claims filed on 05/15/2026 have been entered.
Claims 1-12 are pending and rejected under prior art and are examined on their merits below.
The objections of claim 1, and the dependent claims, 2-12, made in the previous Office action are overcome by the amendment and withdrawn; however, in light of the amendment, a new objection and 35 USC 112 rejection is presented below.
The double patenting rejection of Claim 8, of the previous Office action, are overcome by the amendment and are now withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the groove limitation: Applicant argues that Nakano’s grooves are formed in a rigid resin battery holder rather than in an elastic member that presses the battery cells, and therefore it would not have been obvious to modify Churchill based on Nakano’s teaching.
However, Churchill teaches an elastic member that presses the battery cells, while Nakano teaches longitudinal grooves 6 formed on an inner tubular surface of insertion portion 4 extending in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical battery (Figs. 1-3; [0031]). Nakano further teaches that the longitudinal grooves 6 are extended and opened to both ends of the insertion portion 4 to suppress heat conduction throughout the cylindrical battery 1 ([0038]). Thus, Nakano teaches the claimed groove structure and its thermal management function.
It would have been obvious to apply Nakano’s groove structure to Churchill’s base elastic member to suppress heat conduction and improve cooling because both references are directed to thermal management of cylindrical battery packs. The rejection relies on Nakano for the groove structure and associated function, not for the elasticity of the member itself.
Therefore, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Regarding the through-hole limitation: Applicant argues that Kim’s through-holes are formed between insertion cylinders in a heat dissipation member rather than in an elastic member that presses the battery cells.
However, Churchill teaches an elastic member that presses the battery cells, while Kim teaches through-holes 312 extending in a longitudinal direction between insertion cylinders 313a-d to allow air circulation for cooling and temperature control (Figs. 10-11; [0093, 0101]). Thus, Kim teaches the claimed through-hole structure and associated cooling function.
It would have been obvious to incorporate Kim’s through-hole structure into Churchill’s base elastic member because both references relate to thermal management of battery packs, and the modification would predictably improve airflow and cooling performance.
The rejection relies on Kim for the teaching of longitudinal through-holes and their cooling function, not for the specific material of the member.
Therefore, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5, the number “4” appears at line 1, which had been removed from the previously presented claim 5 appears to be inadvertently included. This number must be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the tubular body" in lines 15-16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. because claim 1 does not recite “a tubular body” prior to the recitation in lines 15-16.
Claims 1-12 are similarly rejected for depending upon claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “a tubular body” in line 2. However, “tubular body” is previously recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, “a tubular body” recited in line 2 is interpreted as corresponding to “tubular body” previously recited in claim 1. Accordingly, to avoid the appearance of introducing a new element, applicant is advised to amend “a tubular body” in line 2 to “the tubular body”.
Claim 9 recites “a tubular body” in line 2. However, “tubular body” is previously recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, “a tubular body” recited in line 2 is interpreted as corresponding to “tubular body” previously recited in claim 1. Accordingly, to avoid the appearance of introducing a new element, applicant is advised to amend “a tubular body” in line 2 to “the tubular body”.
Claims 10-11 are similarly rejected for depending upon claim 9.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Churchill (US 20210288362 Al), and further in view of Nakano et al. (JP 2019053816 A, citations from enclosed machine translation) and Kim et al. (US 20170125755 Al).
Regarding claim 1, Churchill teaches an assembled battery in which battery cells is connected serially or in parallel ([0003]; multiple electrochemical cells connected in series and parallel arrays). Churchill further teaches that a variety of electrochemical cell types can be used, including prismatic and cylindrical cells ([0022]). Churchill also teaches that each cell includes an electrode assembly [0050]. In the embodiment employing prismatic cells, side outer surfaces of the cells (i.e., left and right surfaces of exemplary cells 103, 104 in Fig. 6) constitute a peripheral surface that is orthogonal to the electrode surface (i.e., surface of 52 shown in Fig. 7). Churchill further teaches arranging adjacent cells with a thermal management multilayer sheet 403 disposed therebetween (multilayer management sheet 403; [0047], Figs. 4 and 6). In the prismatic or cylindrical embodiment, adjacent cells arranged side by side inherently have peripheral surfaces facing one another (see also Churchill [0019, 0051] regarding arrangement of adjacent cells and thermal management multilayer sheet). Accordingly, Churchill teaches the claim limitations that the battery cells each having an electrode surface having an electrode and a peripheral surface orthogonal to the electrode surface and being disposed such that the peripheral surfaces face each other. Churchill further teaches limitations wherein the assembled battery comprising the battery cells (battery cells 103 and 104 in Fig. 6), and a flameproof material ([0043]) covering the peripheral surface of the battery cells ([0040, 0046]: multilayer sheet, including a flameproof material layer, may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell). Specifically, Churchill discloses a layer comprising an intumescent composition configured to reduce the spread of flames ([0043]). This layer provides flame-resistant protection by forming a char and limiting flame propagation ([0043]). Churchill further teaches a heat dissipation member (heat-spreading layers 61, 63 within multilayer sheet of Figs. 1-3 [0028, 0040]) covering the peripheral surface of the battery cells ([0046]: multilayer sheet may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell). Churchill further teaches an elastic member (integrity layers 84, 86 within multilayer sheet of Figs. 1-3, made of elastic materials as listed in [0033-0035]). The instant application (at Specification [0021]) describes that the elastic member is made of rubber or an elastomer. Churchill likewise teaches that integrity layers 84 and 86 can independently include continuous rubber or elastomer fibers ([0033]–[0035]). Thus, Churchill discloses the elastic member as claimed. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic member covering at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells (Fig. 1, [0040, 0046]: multilayer sheet, including an elastic member layer, may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell) and pressing the battery cells ([0051]). Specifically, Churchill discloses that assembly pressure of the battery can hold stacked components into place ([0051]). This disclosure suggests that multilayer structure, including insulating material as one of the layers, are configured to press against and secure the battery cell.
Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the heat dissipation member covers the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material. However, Churchill discloses that various combinations and subcombinations of layers can be used depending on the desired properties ([0040]). Thus, Churchill expressly contemplates flexibility in layer selection and ordering. Accordingly, in view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to arrange the heat dissipation member such that the heat dissipation member covering the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material, as claimed.
Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the elastic member disposed between the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member, or the elastic member covering at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with both the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member. However, Churchill discloses that various combinations and subcombinations of layers can be used depending on the desired properties ([0040]). Thus, Churchill expressly contemplates flexibility in layer selection and ordering. Accordingly, in view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to arrange the elastic member disposed between the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member, the elastic member covering at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with both the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member (based on [0040] for flexibility in layer selection and ordering ).
Churchill does not teach a limitation wherein the elastic member has a plurality of grooves extending in an inner surface of the tubular body from one end to the other end of elastic member.
However, Nakano teaches this limitation (longitudinal grooves 6 in Fig. 1, [0031]). In particular, Nakano discloses a battery holder 2 including a tubular insertion portion 4 having longitudinal grooves 6 formed on the inner surface of the insertion portion and extending in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical battery (four longitudinal grooves 6 in Figs 1-3, [0031]). These grooves extend along the inner surface in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical battery and can suppress heat conduction throughout the cylindrical battery ([0038]) . Further, modified Churchill, and Nakano are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery pack.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elastic member structure of modified Churchill, to include a plurality of longitudinal grooves on the inner surface of the tubular body, from one end to the other end, as taught by Nakano in order to suppress heat conduction throughout the cylindrical battery ([0038]).
Churchill does not teach a limitation wherein the elastic member has a plurality of through holes piercing the elastic member from one end to the other end of the elastic member.
However, Kim discloses this limitation. Specifically Kim teaches battery packaging module that includes a heat dissipation member 310a having a plurality of insertion cylinders arranged in a lattice type and through-holes 312 formed between the insertion cylinders in a direction that is parallel to the longitudinal direction of the insertion cylinders (Fig 10-11, [0093-0094]). Kim further teaches that the through-holes extend along the longitudinal direction of the insertion cylinders and allow air to circulate through the heat dissipation member to perform a cooling and temperature control function ([0101]). Further, modified Churchill, and Kim are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of thermal management of battery pack.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elastic member of modified Churchill to include a plurality of longitudinal through-holes, from one end to the other end, as taught by Kim, in order to improve cooling and temperature regulation of the battery cells ([0101]).
Regarding claim 3, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the heat dissipation member ([0028], heat-spreading layers 61, 63) is a sheet-shaped heat dissipation material ([0028]: the heat-spreading layer can be a tape or sheet) wrapped around the peripheral surface of the battery cells ([0022, 0027, 0040, 0046, 0051]). Specifically, paragraph [0046] discloses that the multilayer sheet may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell. Churchill further teaches that the thermal management multilayer sheet may be applied to a cylindrical battery cell ([0022, 0027]). A cylindrical cell necessarily includes a curved side wall extending around the cell and wrapping the cell. Moreover, paragraph [0051] teaches that the thermal management multilayer sheet may be disposed directly on a cell or cell array in any configuration, including the sides of the cells. When placed on the sides of the cells, the sheet conforms to the peripheral surface of the battery cell in a manner consistent with wrapping around the cell body. Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the heat dissipation material is wrapped around the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material. However, Churchill discloses that various combinations and subcombinations of layers can be used depending on the desired properties ([0040]). Thus, Churchill expressly contemplates flexibility in layer selection and ordering. Accordingly, in view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to arrange the heat dissipation member such that the sheet-shaped heat dissipation material wrapped around the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material, as claimed.
Regarding claim 4, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the heat dissipation member is made of at least one material selected from among metals, carbon, and ceramics ([0028]).
Regarding claim 6, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the assembled battery of claim 1 includes the elastic member (as discussed in claim 1, integrity layers 84, 86 within multilayer sheet of Figs. 1-3, made of elastic materials as listed in [0033-0035]). Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic member covering at least the part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells (as discussed in claim 1, Fig. 1, [0040, 0046]: multilayer sheet, including an elastic member layer, may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell) and pressing the battery cells (as discussed in claim 1, [0051]). Specifically, Churchill discloses that assembly pressure of the battery can hold stacked components into place ([0051]). This disclosure suggests that multilayer structure, including insulating material as one of the layers, are configured to press against and secure the battery cell. Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the elastic member disposed between the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member, the elastic member covering at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material. However, Churchill discloses that various combinations and subcombinations of layers can be used depending on the desired properties ([0040]). Thus, Churchill expressly contemplates flexibility in layer selection and ordering. Accordingly, in view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to arrange the elastic member disposed between the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member, the elastic member covering at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with the flameproof material (based on [0040] for flexibility in layer selection and ordering).
Regarding claim 7, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the assembled battery of claim 1 includes the elastic member (as discussed in claim 1, integrity layers 84, 86 within multilayer sheet of Figs. 1-3, made of elastic materials as listed in [0033-0035]) provided to at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells (as discussed in claim 1, Fig. 1, [0040, 0046]: multilayer sheet, including an elastic member layer, may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell), the elastic member covering the peripheral surface along a peripheral direction and pressing the battery cells ([0051]). For providing more details, the instant application (at Specification [0021]) describes that the elastic member is made of rubber or an elastomer. Churchill likewise teaches that integrity layers 84 and 86 can independently include continuous rubber or elastomer fibers ([0033]–[0035]). Thus, Churchill discloses the elastic member as claimed. Churchill also discloses that assembly pressure of the battery can hold stacked components into place ([0051]). This disclosure suggests that multilayer structure, including insulating material as one of the layers, are configured to press against and secure the battery cell. Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the elastic member provided to at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with both the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member. However, Churchill discloses that various combinations and subcombinations of layers can be used depending on the desired properties ([0040]). Thus, Churchill expressly contemplates flexibility in layer selection and ordering. Accordingly, in view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to arrange the elastic member wherein elastic member provided to at least a part of the peripheral surface of the battery cells which is covered with both the flameproof material and the heat dissipation member.
Regarding claim 8, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 6 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic member is made of a rubber or an elastomer ([0033]–[0035]).
Regarding claim 12, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Churchill further teaches a limitation wherein a battery pack in which the assembled battery according to a claim 1 is encased in a battery case (Fig. 8, [0052], housing 800).
Claims 2, 5, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Nishikawa et al. (WO 2020066565 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the heat dissipation member is a tubular body which is open at both ends. However, Churchill teaches that the thermal management multilayer sheet may be applied to cylindrical battery cell ([0027]). A cylindrical cell necessarily includes a curved side wall extending between two open ends. When a sheet-shaped heat dissipation member is wrapped around the peripheral surface of such a cylindrical cell, as taught by Churchill, the resulting structure forms a tubular body surrounding the side wall of the cell. Additionally, paragraph [0046] discloses that the multilayer sheet may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell. Thus, Churchill contemplates configurations in which the heat dissipation member surrounds the cylindrical side wall while remaining open at the top and bottom ends of the cell, as claimed. Further, Nishikawa explicitly teaches this limitation wherein the heat dissipation member (a coating sheet 10 includes inorganic filler that can be satisfactorily used for heat dissipation [page 6, lines 20-21]) is a tubular body which is open at both ends (a coating sheet 10, that covers the outer peripheral surface of the cylindrical lithium-ion battery 20A, except for both end surfaces [page 3, lines 55-59, FIG. 1A. Middle figure]). Such a configuration corresponds to a heat dissipation member with tubular body open at both ends. Nishikawa additionally teaches that the battery cover sheet is used to facilitate efficient arrangement of a plurality of batteries (page 1, lines 12-13). Further, Churchill, and Nishikawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery pack.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the heat dissipation member of modified Churchill to have a tubular body open at both ends as taught by Nishikawa in order to facilitate efficient arrangement of a plurality of batteries (page 1, lines 12-13).
Regarding claim 5, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the flameproof material contains organic fibers and/or inorganic fibers. While Churchill teaches that the flameproof material comprising organic materials ([0043]), it is silent as to whether the material is fibrous. However, Nishikawa explicitly teaches this limitation wherein a flameproof material (page 8, line 22, battery cover sheet 10 with flame retardancy) contains organic fibers and/or inorganic fibers (page 8, lines 23-31). The fibers mentioned in Nishikawa page 8, lines 23-31, include both inorganic fibers (glass fiber) and organic fiber (polyimide fiber). Nishikawa further teaches that inclusion of such fibers provides improved flame retardancy heat dissipation, and stability (page 17, lines 50-52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the heat dissipation member of modified Churchill to include organic fibers and/or inorganic fibers as taught by Nishikawa in order to improve flame retardancy heat dissipation, and stability (page 17, lines 50-52).
Regarding claim 9, Churchill, as modified by Nakano and Kim, teaches all claim limitations of claim 6 as stated above. Modified Churchill does not explicitly teach a limitation wherein the elastic member is a tubular body which is open at both ends. However, Churchill teaches that the thermal management multilayer sheet may be applied to cylindrical battery cell ([0027]). A cylindrical cell necessarily includes a curved side wall extending between two open ends. When a sheet-shaped elastic member is wrapped around the peripheral surface of such a cylindrical cell, as taught by Churchill, the resulting structure forms a tubular body surrounding the side wall of the cell. Additionally, paragraph [0046] discloses that the multilayer sheet may extend past an edge of an electrochemical cell in order to cover at least a portion or all of a surface of the cell. Thus, Churchill contemplates configurations in which the elastic member surrounds the cylindrical side wall while remaining open at the top and bottom ends of the cell, as claimed. Further, Nishikawa explicitly teaches this limitation wherein an elastic member (coating sheet 10, which includes fiber base material, for example rubber [page 8, lines 7-10, and 51], which is similar to elastic rubber member disclosed in Churchill) is a tubular body which is open at both ends (a coating sheet 10, that covers the outer peripheral surface of the cylindrical lithium-ion battery 20A, except for both end surfaces [page 3, lines 55-59, FIG. 1A. Middle figure]). Such a configuration corresponds to an elastic member with tubular body open at both ends. Nishikawa additionally teaches that the battery cover sheet is used to facilitate efficient arrangement of a plurality of batteries (page 1, lines 12-13). Further, Churchill, and Nishikawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery pack.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the elastic member of modified Churchill to have a tubular body open at both ends as taught by Nishikawa in order to facilitate efficient arrangement of a plurality of batteries (page 1, lines 12-13).
Regarding claim 10, Churchill, as modified by Nakano, Kim, and Nishikawa, teaches all claim limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Nakano further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic member has the plurality of grooves extending in an inner surface of the tubular body from one end to the other end of the tubular body. Same as claim 1, Nakano discloses a battery holder 2 including a tubular insertion portion 4 having longitudinal grooves 6 formed on the inner surface of the insertion portion and extending in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical battery (four longitudinal grooves 6 in Figs 1-3, [0031]). These grooves extend along the inner surface in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical battery and can suppress heat conduction throughout the cylindrical battery ([0038]) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elastic member structure of modified Churchill, to have grooves extending in an inner surface of the tubular body from one end to the other end of the tubular body as taught by Nakano in order to suppress heat conduction throughout the cylindrical battery ([0038]).
Regarding claim 11, Churchill, as modified by Nakano, Kim, and Nishikawa, teaches all claim limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Kim further teaches a limitation wherein the elastic member has the plurality of through holes piercing the tubular body from one end to the other end of the tubular body. Same as claim 1, Kim teaches battery packaging module that includes a heat dissipation member 310a having a plurality of insertion cylinders arranged in a lattice type and through-holes 312 formed between the insertion cylinders in a direction that is parallel to the longitudinal direction of the insertion cylinders (Fig 10-11, [0093-0094]). Kim further teaches that the through-holes extend along the longitudinal direction of the insertion cylinders and allow air to circulate through the heat dissipation member to perform a cooling and temperature control function ([0101]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have through holes piercing the tubular body from one end to the other end of the tubular body, as taught by Kim, in order to improve cooling and temperature regulation of the battery cells ([0101]).
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 Lili Rassouli whose telephone number is (571)272-9760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM-4:00 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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/LILI RASSOULI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/JESSIE WALLS-MURRAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights