DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/04/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
3. Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “catalyst particle” in claim 1, line 6 should read “catalyst particles”.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation “the support” in claim 1, lines 4-6 should read “the porous carbon support”.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation “the reactor” in claim 1, lines 8-9 should read “the flow-type reactor”.
Regarding claim 2, the recitation “solid components” in claim 2, line 10 should read “solid component”.
Regarding claim 4, the recitation “catalyst particle” in claim 4, line 2 should read “catalyst particles”.
Regarding claim 6, the recitation “catalyst particle” in claim 6, line 2 should read “catalyst particles”.
Regarding claim 7, the recitation “catalyst particle” in claim 7, line 2 should read “catalyst particles”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. Claims 1-9 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.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “the temperature” in claim 1, line 9, and “the decomposition temperature” in claim 1, line 10 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitations will be interpreted as “a temperature” and “a decomposition temperature” respectively.
Regarding claim 2, the recitations “the solid component” in claim 2, line 6, and “the liquid component” in claim 2, lines 6-7 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitations will be interpreted as “a solid component” and “a liquid component” respectively.
Further regarding claim 2, the recitation “and the resulting dispersion” in claim 2, line 5 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim as a dispersion has not been previously recited. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “resulting in a dispersion, and the dispersion”.
Regarding claim 4, the recitation “Pt (0 valence)” in claim 4, line 2 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by (0 valence). For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “Pt”.
Regarding claim 7, the recitation “the surface” in claim 7, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a surface”.
Regarding claim 8, the recitation “a catalyst layer” in claim 8, line 3 is indefinite because a catalyst layer has been previously introduced in the claim so it is unclear if this catalyst layer is the same or different from the previously recited catalyst layer. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “the catalyst layer”.
Regarding claim 9, the recitation “a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA)” in claim 9, line 3 is indefinite because a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) has already been introduced so it is unclear if they are the same or different. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “the membrane-electrode assembly (MEA)”.
Regarding claim(s) 3 and 5-6, the claim(s) is/are rejected as they depend from, and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter from claims rejected under this statute.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, and 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (Pub. No. CN 111013625 A) in view of Suzue et al. (Pub. No. US 20140287344 A1) in view of Kuttiyiel et al. (Pub. No. US 20150147682 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches a method of producing an electrode catalyst (PtMNx @ Pt / C multi-component core-shell structure nanocatalyst, see [0012]) having a carbon support (carbon material carrier, see [0012]), and catalyst particles (PtM, see [0012] where b) the PtM is PtM/C alloy nanoparticles) containing Pt (see [0012] where the nanocatalyst contains platinum) supported on the support (carbon material carrier, see [0012]), the method including: a first step (step a) and b), see [0012]) for preparing a powder (PtM/C alloy nanoparticles, see [0112], the particles are nanoparticles therefore in a dry form it would be a powder) in which the catalyst particles (PtM, see [0012] where b) the PtM is PtM/C alloy nanoparticles) are supported on the support (carbon material carrier, see [0012] part b) where the PtM is supported on C, the right side of the slash is considered catalyst particles, and the left is considered the support material) by using the support (carbon material carrier, see [0012]) and raw materials (pt precursor and transition metal precursor solution, see [0012]) of the catalyst particle (PtM, see [0012] where b) the PtM is PtM/C alloy nanoparticles); and a second step (gas phase nitridation, see c) in [0012]) for accommodating the powder (PtM/C alloy nanoparticles, see [0112], the particles are nanoparticles therefore in a dry form it would be a powder) obtained through the first step (step a) and b), see [0012] where the PtM/C alloy nanoparticles are used in the gas phase nitridation, although there is another processing step in between it is still a material obtained through steps a) and b)) in a flow-type reactor (reactor used during gas-phase nitriding, see [0022] where the NH3 is flowing in the reactor, therefore it is a flow type reactor), flowing ammonia gas (NH3, see [0022] where NH3 has a flow rate of 30-80 ml/min) through the reactor (reactor used during gas-phase nitriding, see [0022] where the NH3 is flowing in the reactor, therefore it is a flow type reactor) under conditions of a concentration of 10 to 100% (100%, see [0022] only NH3 is flowing so it is 100%) and a pressure of 0.1 MPa to 0.5 MPa (see [0022] the pressure is not explicitly stated, therefore it is considered to be run at room or standard pressure of 0.101325 MPa), and regulating the temperature in the reactor to 500° C. or more and less than the decomposition temperature of ammonia (400-600oC, see [0022], further see [0043] Example 1 shows an example of temperature at 500pC), to chemically react the powder (PtM/C alloy nanoparticles, see [0112], the particles are nanoparticles therefore in a dry form it would be a powder) and the ammonia gas (NH3, see [0022] where NH3 has a flow rate of 30-80 ml/min, as the powder is put in a reactor under ammonia atmosphere the two components would react), but fails to teach wherein the carbon support is a porous carbon support that has nanopores having a pore diameter of 1 to 20 nm and a BET specific surface area (nitrogen adsorption specific surface area) of 700 to 900 m.sup.2/g, and keeping for 5-10 hours. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Suzue teaches a porous carbon support (porous carrier, see [0025], see [0037] where the porous carrier is made of a carbon material) that has nanopores (see [0025] where the pore diameter is nanometer sized therefore nanopores) having a pore diameter of 1 to 20 nm (4-20 nm, see [0025]) and a BET specific surface area (nitrogen adsorption specific surface area) of 700 to 900 m.sup.2/g (80-1200 m.sup.2/g, see [0062], see [0126] gives a specific example of 800 m.sup.2/g), wherein the porous carbon support (porous carrier, see [0025], see [0037] where the porous carrier is made of a carbon material) is Ketjen Black EC300J (Ketjen Black EC300J, see [0126]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu to substitute the carbon material carrier as taught by Xu for the porous carrier of Ketjen Black EC300J as taught by Suzue to exhibit excellent power generation performance even in case of reducing used amount of catalyst (see [0011] of Suzue). Further Xu teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
Xu in view of Suzue fails to teach keeping for 5-10 hours. However, Kuttiyiel teaches keeping for 5-10 hours (1-10 hours, see [0070]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue such that the time for keeping is 1-10 hours as taught by Kuttiyiel to provide nitride stabilized nanoparticles with higher catalytic activities and improved durability with minimal loading (see [0070] of Kuttiyiel). The range of 1-10 hours encompasses the claimed range of 5-10 hours and therefore it would be obvious to modify the range to stay within the claimed range of 5-10 hours as a prima facie case of obviousness exists “in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” (MPEP 2144.05.I). Further Xu in view of Suzue teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
The Examiner would like to note that Xu does teach keeping for 1-3 hours in [0022], and it is the Examiner’s position that there would be no functional difference between the methods of treating for 3 hours or 5 hours.
Regarding claim 3, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches wherein the porous carbon support (porous carrier, see [0025] of Suzue, see modification above) is Ketjen Black EC300J (Ketjen Black EC300J, see [0126] of Suzue, see modifications above).
Regarding claim 4, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches wherein the catalyst particle (PtM, see [0012] where b) the PtM is PtM/C alloy nanoparticles) is a catalyst particle made of Pt (0 valence) (see [0012] where the catalyst particles are made from Pt precursor and therefore made from Pt). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
Regarding claim 6, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches wherein the catalyst particle (PtM, see [0012] where b) the PtM is PtM/C alloy nanoparticles) is a catalyst particle made of a PtNi alloy (see [0024] where the M is Ni, therefore in [0012] the alloy nanoparticles are alloys of Pt and Ni).
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches an electrode catalyst (PtMNx @ Pt / C multi-component core-shell structure nanocatalyst, see [0012]) produced by the method of producing the electrode catalyst (PtMNx @ Pt / C multi-component core-shell structure nanocatalyst, see [0012]) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach a method of producing a gas diffusion electrode having a catalyst layer and a gas diffusion layer for supplying a reaction gas to the catalyst layer, which comprises a step of preparing an ink for forming a catalyst layer which contains at least an electrode catalyst produced by the method of producing the electrode catalyst according to claim 1, a solid polymer electrolyte (ionomer), and a dispersion medium. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Suzue further teaches a method of producing a gas diffusion electrode (3a/4a or 3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] where the 3a/4a are a anode layer, and 3c/4c are the cathode layer) having a catalyst layer (3a or 3c, Fig. 1, see [0029]) and a gas diffusion layer (4a or 4c, Fig. 1, see [0029]) for supplying a reaction gas (fuel gas or oxidant gas, see [0110]) to the catalyst layer (3a or 3c, Fig. 1, see [0029], see [0110] where the gas is diffused to the catalyst layers), which comprises a step of preparing an ink (catalyst ink, see [0097]) for forming a catalyst layer (3a or 3c, Fig. 1, see [0029]) which contains at least an electrode catalyst (catalyst powder, see [0097]), a solid polymer electrolyte (ionomer) (polymer electrolyte, see [0097], see [0052] wherein the polymer electrolyte is an ionomer and a solid electrolyte), and a dispersion medium (solvent, see [0097]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel such that the electrode catalyst as taught by Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel is used to form the gas diffusion electrode as taught by Suzue as an art effective equivalent electrode catalyst for use in an electrode (see 3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0029] of Suzue, and see [0050] of Xu where the catalyst can be used in an electrode). Further Xu in view of Suzue and further in view of Kuttiyiel teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
Regarding claim 9, Xu in view of Suzue and further in view of Kuttiyiel teaches the gas diffusion electrode (3a/4a or 3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] where the 3a/4a are a anode layer, and 3c/4c are the cathode layer, see Suzue, see modification above) produced by the method of producing the gas diffusion electrode (3a/4a or 3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] where the 3a/4a are a anode layer, and 3c/4c are the cathode layer, see Suzue, see modification above) according to claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above) is used for at least one of an anode (3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0029] of Suzue where 3a/4a are an anode, see modification above) and a cathode (3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] of Suzue where 3c/4c are a cathode, see modification above), but fails to teach a method of producing a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) having an anode, a cathode, and a polymer electrolyte membrane disposed between the anode and the cathode, in the method of producing a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA), the gas diffusion electrode produced by the method of producing the gas diffusion electrode according to claim 8 is used for at least one of the anode and the cathode. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Suzue teaches a method of producing a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) (membrane electrode assembly, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0117] describes methods of producing) having an anode (3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3a/4a is the anode), a cathode (3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3c/4c is the cathode), and a polymer electrolyte membrane (2, Fig. 1, see [0103]) disposed between the anode (3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3a/4a is the anode) and the cathode (3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3c/4c is the cathode), in the method of producing a membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) (membrane electrode assembly, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0117] describes methods of producing), the gas diffusion electrode (3a/4a or 3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] where the 3a/4a are a anode layer, and 3c/4c are the cathode layer) produced by the method of producing the gas diffusion electrode (3a/4a or 3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0029] where the 3a/4a are a anode layer, and 3c/4c are the cathode layer) is used for at least one of the anode (3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3a/4a is the anode, see [0103] where the gas diffusion electrode described above can be used for the anode) and the cathode (3c/4c, Fig. 1, see [0103], see [0029] where 3c/4c is the cathode, see [0103] where the gas diffusion electrode described above can be used for the cathode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel such that the electrode catalyst as taught by Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel is used to form the gas diffusion electrode and wherein the gas diffusion electrode is used in the membrane electrode assembly as taught by Suzue as an art effective equivalent electrode catalyst for use in an electrode (see 3a/4a, Fig. 1, see [0029] of Suzue, and see [0050] of Xu where the catalyst can be used in an electrode), and therefore an art effective equivalent gas diffusion electrode for use in a membrane electrode assembly. Further Xu in view of Suzue and further in view of Kuttiyiel teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
7. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (Pub. No. CN 111013625 A) in view of Suzue et al. (Pub. No. US 20140287344 A1) in view of Kuttiyiel et al. (Pub. No. US 20150147682 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhou et al. (Pub. No. CN 109378482 A) in view of Xia et al. (Pub. No. CN 110783577 A).
Regarding claim 2, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches between the first step (step a) and b), see [0012]) for preparing a powder (PtM/C alloy nanoparticles, see [0112], the particles are nanoparticles therefore in a dry form it would be a powder) and the second step (gas phase nitridation, see c) in [0012]); a nitric acid treatment step (treat with dilute acid, see [0012], see [0021] where the dilute acid is HNO3) where the powder (PtM/C alloy nanoparticles, see [0112], the particles are nanoparticles therefore in a dry form it would be a powder) obtained through the first step (step a) and b), see [0012]) is treated in an aqueous nitric acid solution (dilute acid, see [0012], see [0021] wherein the acid is HNO3) of 0.01 to 1.5 mol/L (0.03-0.2 mol/L, see [0021]); after the nitric acid treatment step (treat with dilute acid, see [0012], see [0021] where the dilute acid is HNO3), a washing step (filter with suction and wash, see [0012]) where the solid component (solids portion of treatment step, see [0012] where the nanoparticles are solid, therefore the solid component) and the liquid component (dilute acid solution, see [0012]) are separated (filtered, see [0012]), and the solid component (solids portion of treatment step, see [0012] where the nanoparticles are solid, therefore the solid component) is washed one or more times (see [0012] after filtering the PtM/C is washed); and a drying step (dry, see [0012]) where the solid components (solids portion of treatment step, see [0012] where the nanoparticles are solid, therefore the solid component) obtained through the washing step (filter with suction and wash, see [0012]) are filtered and then dried into powder (see [0012] where after the drying step pure PtM/C alloy nanomaterials are obtained, as they are nanomaterials it is considered a powder material, and further as it is a pure form, it is the examiners position this material is filtered and dried), but fails to teach dispersing the powder and the resulting dispersion is held at 60 to 95oC for 1 to 3 hours while stirring, and wherein the solid component is washed with ion-exchanged water. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Zhou teaches dispersing (dispersed, see [0058] shows a specific example of solid sample dispersed in nitric acid solution) the powder (solid obtained, see [0032]) and the resulting dispersion (solid dispersed in nitric acid solution, see [0032], see [0058] shows specific example) is held at 60 to 95oC (20-260oC, see [0037], see [0058] gives a specific example of 60oC) for 1 to 3 hours (0.1 to 80 hours, see [0037]) while stirring (see [0058] shows the dispersion was done at 60oC, therefore it is considered continued to be dispersed), and washing with high purity water (see [0038] where the washing is performed with high-purity water).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel to disperse the PtM/C alloyed nanoparticles in the nitric acid solution at a temperature of 60oC for a time range of 0.1 to 80 hours and washing with high purity water as taught by Zhou to ensure removal of excess non-precious metal elements on the surface are removed (see [0032] of Zhou), and further obvious to modify the time range to stay within the claimed range of 1 to 3 hours as a prima facie case of obviousness exists “in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” (MPEP 2144.05.I). Further Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel in view of Zhou fails to teach wherein the high-purity water is ion-exchanged water.
However, Xia teaches washing (washed, see [0060]) with ion-exchanged water (deionized water, see [0060], it is the Examiner’s position that deionized water is a form of ion-exchanged water).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel in view of Zhou such that the high purity water is deionized water as taught by Xia as an art effective equivalent high purity water for washing acid treated material (see [0060] of Xia). Further Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel in view of Zhou teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
8. Claim(s) 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (Pub. No. CN 111013625 A) in view of Suzue et al. (Pub. No. US 20140287344 A1) in view of Kuttiyiel et al. (Pub. No. US 20150147682 A1) as applied to claim 3 and 4 above, and further in view of Yamamoto (Pub. No. JP 2005100713 A).
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel fails to teach wherein the catalyst particles further contain a Pt oxide.
However, Yamamoto teaches wherein the catalyst particles (noble metal containing particles, see [0010], see [0020] the noble metal contained is platinum) further contain a Pt oxide (noble metal oxide shell formed, see [0010], see [0011] where the noble metal oxide is produced by oxidizing the outside layer of only the noble metal particles).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel to modify the surface of the catalyst particles to oxidize the platinum to obtain a layer of platinum oxide as taught by Yamamoto to prevent deterioration of battery characteristics by preventing aggregation of noble metals efficiently (See [0008] of Yamamoto). Further Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
Regarding claim 7, Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel fails to teach wherein the catalyst particle have a core-shell structure having a core particle and a Pt-containing shell which covers at least part of the surface of the core particle. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Yamamoto teaches wherein the catalyst particles (noble metal containing particles, see [0010], see [0020] the noble metal contained is platinum) have a core-shell structure (core is a noble metal alloy, and shell is a noble metal oxide, see [0011]) having a core particle (core part is noble metal alloy, see [0011]) and a Pt-containing shell (shell is a noble metal oxide, see [0020] where the noble metal is platinum, therefore by oxidizing the platinum the shell is a platinum oxide) which covers at least part of the surface of the core particle (core part is noble metal alloy, see [0011], as the shell is made from oxidizing the platinum in the core it would cover at least a part of the surface of the core).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel to modify the surface of the catalyst particles to oxidize the platinum to obtain a layer of platinum oxide to obtain a core-shell particle as taught by Yamamoto to prevent deterioration of battery characteristics by preventing aggregation of noble metals efficiently (See [0008] of Yamamoto). Further Xu in view of Suzue in view of Kuttiyiel teaches that modifications can be made (see [0033] of Xu).
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS CALEB MARROQUIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/DOUGLAS C MARROQUIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights