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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III, claims 6–19 in the reply filed on December 29, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 6–19 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 6 recites:
6. A micro bubble generation device, comprising a gas accommodating chamber disposed below a liquid surface and a gas transmission pipeline for delivering gas into the gas accommodating chamber, wherein:
a microporous material layer that allows the gas in the gas accommodating chamber to pass through is provided around a periphery of the gas accommodating chamber;
one end of the gas transmission pipeline is located above the liquid surface and is connected to a gas source, and the other end of the gas transmission pipeline extends into the gas accommodating chamber, so that the gas in the gas accommodating chamber passes through the microporous material layer by gas pressure and forms micro bubbles on an outer surface of the microporous material layer; and
the microporous material layer and/or the liquid outside the microporous material layer cut the micro bubbles by movement, such that the micro bubbles enter into the liquid. Emphasis added.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it is unclear whether the “liquid surface” is a positively or non-positively recited structural element of the claimed device. This is because “liquid surface” is initially introduced as a non-positively recited element of the device, as the claim is to the “micro bubble generation device” itself (instead of a system comprising liquid and the micro bubble generation device). But the claim also contains language indicating that the liquid surface is intended to be structural, as the claim, for instance describes one end of the gas transmission pipeline being “located above the liquid surface.” For the purpose of compact prosecution, claim 6 is interpreted as if the “liquid surface” is not a positively recited structural element of the claimed micro bubble generation device.
Claim 6 is also indefinite because it is a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus. Specifically, claim 6 is an apparatus claim because it its to a “device.” But the claim also recites method steps for using the apparatus in the limitations:
“so that the gas in the gas accommodating chamber passes through the microporous material layer by gas pressure and forms micro bubbles on an outer surface of the microporous material layer” and
“the microporous material layer and/or the liquid outside the microporous material layer cut the micro bubbles by movement, such that the micro bubbles enter into the liquid.”
Therefore, claim 6 is indefinite because it is unclear whether infringement would occur when a device is created that allows the claimed function to be performed, or whether infringement requires that the function is actually performed. See MPEP 2173.05(p), subsection II (a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite).
To overcome the rejections, claim 6 could be rewritten as:
6. A micro bubble generation device, comprising a gas accommodating chamber configured to be disposed below a liquid surface and a gas transmission pipeline for delivering gas into the gas accommodating chamber, wherein:
a microporous material layer that allows the gas in the gas accommodating chamber to pass through is provided around a periphery of the gas accommodating chamber;
one end of the gas transmission pipeline is configured to be located above the liquid surface and is connected to a gas source, and the other end of the gas transmission pipeline extends into the gas accommodating chamber, so that the gas in the gas accommodating chamber is capable of passing
the microporous material layer and/or the liquid outside the microporous material layer are configured to cut the micro bubbles by movement, such that the micro bubbles enter into the liquid.
Claims 7–19 are indefinite because they depend from claim 6.
Also, claim 11 recites:
11. The micro bubble generation device according to claim 10, wherein:
the gas transmission pipeline comprises a first main gas transmission pipe, one end of which is located above the liquid surface, and the other end of which extends into the gas accommodating chamber through the first fixed base and the outer rotor motor in sequence and is internally sealed with a first plugging block;
the first main gas transmission pipe passes through a central hole of the outer rotor motor and is sealingly and fixedly connected with the outer rotor motor;
a plurality of first branch gas transmission pipes are connected to the first main gas transmission pipe located in the gas accommodating chamber, and are uniformly distributed in a circumferential direction of the first main gas transmission pipe; and
the first branch gas transmission pipe comprises a horizontal pipe section and a vertical pipe section, one end of the horizontal pipe section is connected to the first main gas transmission pipe, the other end of the horizontal pipe section extends in a horizontal direction to a position close to the microporous material layer and is connected to a top end of the vertical pipe section, and the bottom end of the vertical pipe section extends vertically downward. Emphasis added.
Claim 11 is indefinite because it is unclear whether “the liquid surface” is a structural element of the claimed device, as explained in the rejection of claim 6 above. To overcome this rejection, claim 11 could be rewritten as:
11. The micro bubble generation device according to claim 10, wherein:
the gas transmission pipeline comprises a first main gas transmission pipe, one end of which is configured to be located above the liquid surface, and the other end of which extends into the gas accommodating chamber through the first fixed base and the outer rotor motor in sequence and is internally sealed with a first plugging block;
the first main gas transmission pipe passes through a central hole of the outer rotor motor and is sealingly and fixedly connected with the outer rotor motor;
a plurality of first branch gas transmission pipes are connected to the first main gas transmission pipe located in the gas accommodating chamber, and are uniformly distributed in a circumferential direction of the first main gas transmission pipe; and
the first branch gas transmission pipe comprises a horizontal pipe section and a vertical pipe section, one end of the horizontal pipe section is connected to the first main gas transmission pipe, the other end of the horizontal pipe section extends in a horizontal direction to a position close to the microporous material layer and is connected to a top end of the vertical pipe section, and the bottom end of the vertical pipe section extends vertically downward.
Claim 18 recites:
18. The micro bubble generation device according to claim 16, wherein:
the device further comprises a fifth fixed base and a second support, and the bottom of the second support is fixed on the fifth fixed base; and
the mounting plate is a flat plate-shaped structure disposed in the horizontal direction, a middle position of each edge of the mounting plate is respectively connected with the second support through a spring, and the spring is in a horizontal state below the liquid surface. Emphasis added.
Claim 18 is indefinite because it is unclear whether the device comprises a multiple springs (as each edge is connected through a spring) or a single spring (as the claim describes “the spring”).
Claim 18 is also indefinite because it is unclear whether “the liquid surface” is a structural element of the claimed device, as explained in the rejection of claim 6 above.
To overcome these rejections, claim 18 could be rewritten as:
18. The micro bubble generation device according to claim 16, wherein:
the device further comprises a fifth fixed base and a second support, and the bottom of the second support is fixed on the fifth fixed base; and
the mounting plate is a flat plate-shaped structure disposed in the horizontal direction, a middle position of each edge of the mounting plate is respectively connected with the second support through a spring, and [[the]] each spring is configured to be in a horizontal state below the liquid surface. Emphasis added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xiao et al., CN 110354705 A1.
Regarding claim 6, Xiao teaches a device for generating microbubbles comprising power output shaft 1, transmission shaft 2, micropore disk 4, tube 6, bearing assembly 5, rotary joint 7, air inlet 8, and the compressed air source (including the tubing) connected to air inlet 8. See Xiao Fig. 2, p. 4 of 7. The device reads on the claimed “micro bubble generation device.” The device comprises an inner cavity of disk 4, which reads on the “gas accommodating chamber.” Id. The limitation requiring that the “gas accommodating chamber” is “disposed below a liquid surface” fails to further limit the scope of the claim because the “liquid” is not a positively recited structural element of the claimed device. See MPEP 2115 (a claim is only limited by positively recited elements). The tube 6, air inlet 8 and the compressed air source (including the tubing) connected to air inlet 8 collectively read on the “gas transmission pipeline for delivering gas into the gas accommodating chamber.” See Xiao Fig. 2, p. 4 of 7.
The micropore disk 4 reads on the “microporous material layer.” See Xiao Fig. 2, p. 4 of 7. The micropore disk 4 allows the gas in the inner cavity of the disk 4 to pass through with the micropore disk 4 being provided around a periphery of the inner cavity of the disk 4. Id.
The upstream end of the compressed air tubing connected to air inlet 8 reads on the “one end of the gas transmission pipeline.” See Xiao Fig. 2, p. 4 of 7. Note that the upstream end of the compressed air tubing that connects to air inlet 8 is capable of being located “above the liquid surface,” as claimed, because the air inlet 8 is outside of cabinet 9 (containing liquid). The upstream end of the tubing is connected to a source of compressed air (the “gas source”), as claimed. Id. The downstream end of hollow tube 6 reads on the “other end of the gas transmission pipeline.” Id. The downstream end of hollow tube 6 extends into the inner cavity of the micropore disk 4 (the “gas accommodating chamber”) so that the gas in the inner cavity passes through the micropore disk 5 by gas pressure and forms micro bubbles on an outer surface of the micropore disk 4, as claimed. Id.
The micropore disk 4 is capable of performing the function of cutting the micro bubbles by movement, such that the micro bubbles enter liquid, as claimed, because the micropore disk 4 rotates as microbubbles enter liquid in the cabinet 9. See Xiao Fig. 2, p. 4 of 7; MPEP 2114 (functional claim language that is not limited to a specific structure covers all devices that are capable of performing the recited function).
PNG
media_image1.png
756
619
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al., CN 110354705 A in view of Seibert et al., US 4,231,768.
Regarding claim 7, Xiao teaches the limitations of claim 6, as explained above.
Xiao differs from claim 7 because it is silent as to the tube 6, air inlet 8 and the compressed air source (including the tubing) connected to air inlet 8 (the “gas transmission pipeline”) including a gas pump, primary filter, and secondary filter in sequence in a flow direction of the gas, with the claimed features.
But Seibert teaches a compressed air system comprising an air compressor A (“the “gas pump”), a coalescing filter D (the “primary filter”), a bacterial-retentive final filter K (the “secondary filter”) in sequence in a flow direction of compressed gas. See Seibert Fig. 1. The bacterial-retentive final filter K has a filter (the “filter element of the secondary filter”) with a pore size that is less than 0.3 µm. Id. at col. 5, ll. 16–31. The coalescing filter D has a second stage coalescer (“a filter element of the primary filter”) ranging from 0.005 to 0.02 inch (127 to 508 µm). Id. at col. 7, ll. 43–53. Also, the micropore disk 4 of Xiao (the “microporous material layer”) has a pore size ranging from 0.01 to 2 µm. See Xiao p. 3 of 4. With these parameters, the filter of the bacterial-retentive final filter K has a pore diameter that is smaller than a pore diameter of the second stage coalescer of coalescing filter D and a pore diameter of the micropore disk 4 of Xiao. The compressed air system of Seibert is beneficial because it produces air that is substantially free of oil and water droplets, as well as particulate and microbial contamination. See Seibert col. 1, ll. 58–63. It would have been obvious to use the compressed air system of Seibert as the source of compressed air in Xiao to provide air that is substantially free of oil and water droplets, as well as particulate and microbial contamination.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al., CN 110354705 A in view of Kato et al., US 2017/0136429 A1 and in further view of Korzeniowski, US 2010/0282653 A1.
Regarding claim 8, Xiao teaches the limitations of claim 6, as explained above.
Xiao differs from claim 6 because it is silent as to the tube 6, air inlet 8 and the compressed air source (including the tubing) connected to air inlet 8 (the “gas transmission pipeline”) being provided with a flow meter and a pressure gauge, with the flow meter being provided with an adjusting knob capable of controlling a flow rate of the gas.
But Kato teaches a micro bubble generating apparatus comprising a gas storing portion (a source of compressed gas) and a gas supply path 12 to a sparger 10 (similar to the disk 4 of Xiao), where the gas supply path 12 comprises a pressure gauge 16 and a flow meter 17. See Kato Fig. 1, [0033]–[0035]. The pressure gauge 16 and flow meter 17 are beneficial because they allow for control of the pressure and flow of compressed gas to the sparger 10. It would have been obvious to provide the pressure gauge 16 and flow meter 17 of Kato on the tubing to the air source 8 of Xiao to provide a mechanism to control the pressure and flow of gas to the disk 4. While Kato is silent as to the flow meter 17 comprising an adjusting knob capable of controlling a flow rate of the gas, Korzeniowski teaches an aeration chamber comprising a flow control valve 53 that can be manually adjusted with the figures illustrating a knob for manually adjusting the valve. See Korzeniowski Fig. 1, [0056]. It would have been obvious for the flow meter 17 of Kato to be a manually operated valve with an adjustable knob in view of Korzeniowski which teaches a manually adjustable flow control valve 53 utilizing a knob, with this modification merely representing automating a manual activity. See MPEP 2144.04, subsection III.
Regarding claim 9, Xiao teaches that the device further comprises an “outer rotor motor” for driving the disk 4 including the inner cavity (the “gas accommodating chamber”) to rotate in a circumferential direction, with the “outer rotor motor” comprising motor 12, bearing assembly 5, hollow tube 6 and transmission shaft 2. See Xiao Figs. 2, 4, p. 3 of 7. The hollow tube 6 of the “outer rotor motor” is disposed in the inner cavity of the disk 4, as claimed. The hollow tube 6 reads on the “outer rotor of the outer rotor motor” and is sealingly and fixedly connected with an inner wall of a lower portion of the disk 4, as claimed, so that gas can flow from air inlet 8 into the inner cavity of the disk 4. Id.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 6, 16, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimoto et al., WO 2021/245995 A1 in view of Kato et al., US 2017/0136429 A1.
Regarding claim 6, Fujimoto teaches a bubble generation device 1 for generating fine bubbles, which reads on the claimed “micro bubble generation device.” See Fujimoto abstract. Note that that the device 1 is capable of generating micro bubbles because it comprises a diaphragm 2 with a pore diameter of 0.05 to 20 µm on the surface in contact with liquid. Id. at p. 4. The device comprises a “gas accommodation chamber,” which is the space below diaphragm 2, as seen in Fig. 1. The limitation requiring that the “gas accommodating chamber” is “disposed below a liquid surface” fails to further limit the scope of the claim because the “liquid” is not a positively recited structural element of the claimed device. See MPEP 2115 (a claim is only limited by positively recited elements). The device 1 also comprises a “gas transmission pipeline for delivering gas into the gas accommodating chamber,” which is the source of gas seen by the arrow at the bottom of Fig. 1.
The device 1 also comprises the diaphragm 2, which reads on the “microporous material layer that allows the gas in the gas accommodating chamber to pass through,” because the diaphragm 2 has pores with a diameter of 0.05 to 20 µm on the surface in contact with liquid to generate bubbles in the liquid. See Fujimoto Fig. 1, p. 4. The diaphragm 2 is provided around a periphery of the “gas accommodating chamber,” as claimed, because the diaphragm 2 surrounds the space below the diaphragm 2.
An end (the “other end”) of the “gas transmission pipeline” extends into the “gas accommodating chamber,” which is the end that opens into the space below the diaphragm 2, so that gas in the “gas accommodating chamber,” passes through the diaphragm 2 by gas pressure and forms fine bubbles on an outer surface of the diaphragm, as claimed. See Fujimoto Fig. 2, p. 4.
The diaphragm 2 and the liquid outside the diaphragm 2 are capable of cutting the fine bubbles by movement, such that the micro bubbles enter the liquid, as claimed, because the diaphragm 2 is vibrated as it discharges bubbles into the liquid. See Fujimoto p. 4.
PNG
media_image2.png
837
978
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fujimoto differs from claim 6 because it is silent as to one end of the “gas transmission pipeline” being capable of being located above a liquid surface and connected to a gas source. But, as noted, gas is supplied to the opening in the bottom of the “gas accommodating chamber,” so that it can pass through the diaphragm 2 into the liquid to create fine bubbles. See Fujimoto Fig. 2, p. 4.
With this in mind, Kato teaches a microbubble generating device comprising a gas storing portion 11 (the “gas source”) connected to one end (the “one end”) of a gas supply path 12 (the “gas transmission pipeline”) with the other end of the gas supply path 12 connected to a porous membrane 19. See Kato Fig. 1, [0033]–[0035].
PNG
media_image3.png
688
740
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to use the gas storing portion 11 and gas supply path 12 of Kato as the source of gas that supplies gas to the space below the diaphragm 2 of Fujimoto because this would merely represent the simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143, subsection I, B. With this modification, the end of the path 12 that connects to the gas storing portion 11 (the “one end”) could be located above a liquid surface because the gas supply path 12 is a conduit that could be positioned where needed.
Regarding claim 16, Fujimoto teaches that the device 1 comprises a brim portion 34, which reads on the “mounting plate.” See Fujimoto Fig. 3, p. 3. The brim portion 34 is capable of vibrating in the horizontal direction, as claimed, because the device 1 is vibrated by piezoelectric element 4. See Fujimoto Fig. 3, p. 3. The diaphragm 2 (the “microporous material layer”) encloses above the brim portion 34 to form the “gas accommodating chamber,” as seen in Fig. 4, which reads on “the microporous material layer encloses at the top of the mounting plate to form the gas accommodating chamber.” The “gas accommodating chamber is provided with a “gas inlet” connected to the “gas transmission pipeline,” as claimed, which is the inlet that supplies gas to the space below the diaphragm 2, as seen in Fig. 1.
The device 1 also comprises the piezoelectric element 4 (the “second driving motor”) disposed below the brim portion 34. See Fujimoto Fig. 3, p. 3. The piezoelectric element 4 is fixed to a center portion of the bottom of the brim portion 34, as seen in Fig. 3. A “motor shaft” (the vertical thickness of piezoelectric element 4) is perpendicular to a surface of the brim portion 34 that is horizontally disposed, as claimed, as seen in Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 17, Fujimoto teaches that the piezoelectric element 4 (the “second driving motor”) is a vibration motor, as claimed. See Fujimoto Fig. 3, p. 3.
Regarding claim 19, Fujimoto teaches that the brim portion 34 (the “mounting plate”) is of a circular shape, as claimed. See Fujimoto Fig. 2, p. 3.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimoto et al., WO 2021/245995 A1 in view of Kato et al., US 2017/0136429 A1 and in further view of Seibert et al., US 4,231,768.
Regarding claim 7, Fujimoto as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6, as explained above.
Fujimoto as modified differs from claim 7 because it is silent as to the “gas transmission pipeline” including a gas pump, primary filter, and secondary filter in sequence in a flow direction of the gas, with the claimed features.
But Seibert teaches a compressed air system comprising an air compressor A (“the “gas pump”) supplying compressed air to a receiver C (similar to the gas storing portion 11 of Kato), a coalescing filter D (the “primary filter”), a bacterial-retentive final filter K (the “secondary filter”) in sequence in a flow direction of compressed gas. See Seibert Fig. 1. The bacterial-retentive final filter K has a filter (the “filter element of the secondary filter”) with a pore size that is less than 0.3 µm. Id. at col. 5, ll. 16–31. The coalescing filter D has a second stage coalescer (“a filter element of the primary filter”) ranging from 0.005 to 0.02 inch (127 to 508 µm). Id. at col. 7, ll. 43–53. Also, the diaphragm 2 of Fujimoto (the “microporous material layer”) has a pore size ranging from 0.05 to 20 µm. See Fujimoto p. 4. With these parameters, the filter of the bacterial-retentive final filter K has a pore diameter that is smaller than a pore diameter of the second stage coalescer of coalescing filter D and a pore diameter of the diaphragm 2 of Fujimoto. The compressed air system of Seibert is beneficial because it produces air that is substantially free of oil and water droplets, as well as particulate and microbial contamination. See Seibert col. 1, ll. 58–63. It would have been obvious to modify the “gas transmission pipeline” of Fujimoto in view of Kato to include these features of Seibert to provide air that is substantially free of oil and water droplets, as well as particulate and microbial contamination.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimoto et al., WO 2021/245995 A1 in view of Kato et al., US 2017/0136429 A1 and in further view of Korzeniowski, US 2010/0282653 A1.
Regarding claim 8, Fujimoto in view of Kato teaches that the gas supply path 12 of Kato (the “gas transmission pipeline”) is provided with a flow meter 17 (the “flow meter”) and a pressure gauge 16 (the “pressure gauge”). While Kato is silent as to the flow meter 17 comprising an adjusting knob capable of controlling a flow rate of the gas, Korzeniowski teaches an aeration chamber comprising a flow control valve 53 that can be manually adjusted with the figures illustrating a knob for manually adjusting the valve. See Korzeniowski Fig. 1, [0056]. It would have been obvious for the flow meter 17 of Kato to be a manually operated valve with an adjustable knob in view of Korzeniowski which teaches a manually adjustable flow control valve 53 utilizing a knob, with this modification merely representing automating a manual activity. See MPEP 2144.04, subsection III.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. BENNETT MCKENZIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5327. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
T. BENNETT MCKENZIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
/T. BENNETT MCKENZIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
1 Xiao is an “X” reference in the International Search Report filed October 27, 2023. A copy of Xiao is in the record as the 19-page Foreign Reference filed October 27, 2023, and this copy is cited in the communication.