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. Claims 1-15 are pending in the application. Claims 16-20 are withdrawn in the application. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT Group I, claims 1-15 in the reply filed on FILLIN "Enter mail date of the reply." \* MERGEFORMAT 02/02/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT there is no serious search burden for the examiner . This is not found persuasive because FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification, • the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter, • and the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL . Claims FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected FILLIN "Enter the appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on FILLIN "Enter mail date of the reply." \* MERGEFORMAT 02/02/2026 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: FILLIN "Enter reference sign(s) not found in the drawings and include page and line number where they first occur in the specification" \* MERGEFORMAT 13 and 15 . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 15 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. The limitations “greater than or equal to about ” and/or “less than or equal to about ” in claims 2, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 13 render the claims vague and indefinite. In determining the range encompassed by the term "about," one must consider the context of the term as it is used in the specification and claims of the application. The court held that claims reciting "at least about" was invalid for indefiniteness where there was close prior art and there was nothing in the specification, prosecution history, or the prior art to provide any indication as to what range of specific activity is covered by the term "about." MPEP 2173.05(b) III A. The instant specification ( para. 0065 ) states: “About” indicates that the stated numerical value allows some slight imprecision (with some approach to exactness in the value; approximately or reasonably close to the value; nearly). If the imprecision provided by “about” is not otherwise understood in the art with this ordinary meaning, then “about” as used herein indicates at least variations that may arise from ordinary methods of measuring and using such parameters. For example, “about” may comprise a variation of less than or equal to 5%, optionally less than or equal to 4%, optionally less than or equal to 3%, optionally less than or equal to 2%, optionally less than or equal to 1%, optionally less than or equal to 0.5%, and in certain aspects, optionally less than or equal to 0.1%. The instant specification only indicates what “about” may encompass. Therefore, the specification lacks a standard for measuring the degrees intended and is indefinite Claim 15 recites “lithium chemically … via plurality of hydrogen bonds” in step (h) is unclear and renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear whether the plurality of hydrogen bonds is formed between lithium and the lithophilic surface on the carbon or between the plurality of -hydroxyl and/or -carboxyl groups on the carbon or it is a H-bond analogue known as Li bond. 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. Claim s FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 1-3, 6, 7, 9- 12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Cheng et al. (WO-2019210673), in view of Ranganathan et al. (Photoresist ‐ Derived Carbon for Microelectromechanical..), Spahr et al. (US 2015/0079477), Tao et al. (A surface chemistry approach ...) and Chen et al. ( Lithiophilicity chemistry of heteroatom-doped carbon...) as evidenced by Hou et al. (Lithium bond chemistry...) Regarding claim 1 and 15 , Cheng et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a lithium metal negative electrode for a lithium metal battery ( abstract ) by (a) coating a photosensitive material ( photoresist layer, para. 0033 ) layer on the surface of a metal substrate ( para. 0033 ), (b) positioning the mask having a pattern ( para.0033 , figure 1 ) , (c) exposing the uncovered region with radiation ( para.003 3 , figure 1 ) , (d) removing the uncovered region from the metal substrate ( develop ment , figure 1 , para. 0033 ) resulting in a metal substrate which has a decorated and a plurality of bare regions ( figure 1 ) . Cheng et al. further discloses (e) etching of the bare regions such that perforations are extending through the metal substrate ( para. 0070- 0072, figure 2 ). The pattern on the mask has apertures through which the radiation passes to expose the underlying photosensitive material disclosing a resultant the metal substrate with an array of micro - nano structure pit formed across ( para. 0072, figure 1 & 2 ). Cheng et al. further discloses (h) deposition of lithium metal on the metal substrate ( para. 0075 ). In another embodiment ( example 2, para. 0076 ) Cheng et al. discloses the metal substrate after etching is assembled with a lithium wafer to deposit lithium metal on the metal substrate ( para. 0078 ). Cheng et al. fails to disclose (f) pyrolyzing the covered region of the remaining photosensitive material layer on the metal substrate to form a carbon layer, (g) forming a lithophilic surface , which comprises of plurality of -hydroxyl and/or -carboxyl groups covalently bonded to the carbon layer and (h) continuous layer of lithium chemically bond s to the lithophilic surface via a plurality of hydrogen bonds . Ranganathan et al. discloses a photosensitive material ( positive photoresist AZ 4330 ) that is spin coated on to a substrate ( silicon wafer ) and then (f) pyrolyz ing at 6 00- 1100 o C in forming gas to produce conductive carbon film with electrical and electrochemical properties ( abstract, Page 278, Col. 2, para. 1 ) . There by remov ing of functional groups which is indicated by the measured weight loss during pyrolysis ( page 278, col. 1, para. 4 , figure 1 ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by Cheng et al. by substituting the photosensitive material of Cheng et al with the photoresist disclosed by Ranganathan et al. and pyrolyzing the photosensitive material to obtain a carbon layer as taught by Ranganathan et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to pyrolyze the photose nsitive material to the arrive at a lithium negative electrode consisting of a metal substrate with patterned carbon layer suitable for electrochemical applications. The combination of Cheng et al. and Ranganathan et al. fails to disclose forming a lithophilic surface which comprises of plurality of -hydroxyl and/or -carboxyl groups covalently bonded to the carbon layer on the carbon layer on the metal substrate and forming a continuous layer of lithium chemically bond ed to the lithophilic surface via a plurality of hydrogen bonds. Sphar et al. discloses surface modification of carbon ( graphite ) materials used in negative electrodes in lithium -ion batteries . Sphar et al. further discloses heating the graphite in an oxygen - containing process gas at temperatures ranging from 500-1100 o C ( para. 0038 ) result ing in surface modification of carbon by introducing carbonyl, carboxyl and hydroxyl group ( para. 0035, 0138 , Table 4 ) . S ince carbon has a valency of four and the carboxyl and/or hydroxyl groups are being bonded to the surface of carbon layer by a substantially similar method as disclosed in the instant specification it would necessarily result in covalent bonds. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al. and Ranganathan et al. and to add surface modification of the carbon layer as taught by Spahr et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the combination to arrive at a lithium negative electrode consisting of a metal substrate with surface modified carbon layer having -hydroxyl and/or -carboxyl groups to improve cycle life, reversible discharge capacity and irreversible capacity . The combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al. and Sphar et al. fails to disclose the oxygen functionalized carbon layer surface is lithophilic and forming a continuous layer of lithium chemically bonds to the lithophilic surface via a plurality of hydrogen bonds. Tao et al. discloses porous carbon scaffolds that can host lithium metal anodes to form potentially stable lithium metal batteries . Tao et al. discloses introducing oxygen and nitrogen containing functional group on the surface carbon layer to improve lithophilicity and incorporating lithium by placing flat on the surface of the molten lithium ( page 2, col. 1, para. 2, figure 1 and supporting information - page 2 ) there by forming a continuous layer ( page 3, para. 1 ) of lithium on the lithophilic surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al. and Spahr et al. to add a continuous layer of lithium to the lithophilic surface of carbon as taught by Tao et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the combination to arrive at a lithium negative electrode consisting of a metal substrate with a carbon layer with a lithophilic surface which bonds with lithium to reduce lithium dendrite formation and volume expansion and to achieve high energy density. The combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al. and Tao et al. fails to disclose the lithophilic surface of the carbon layer chemically bonds lithium via a plurality of hydrogen bonds. Chen et al. discloses a systematic first-principles density functional theory (DFT) study of the lithophilic chemistry of heteroatom- doped carbon frameworks for lithium metal anodes. The O-containing functional groups on carbon create lithophilic surface and lithium forms a chemical bond with the oxygen atom ( electronegative site ) to form lithium bonds ( page 2, para. 1 figure 1 ) . Chen et al. further discloses a strong interaction of lithium with carboxylic group ( aO , page 4. para.2 figure 2C ) forming a bond analogous to “Li bond” ( page 4, para . 2 ) which are analogous to hydrogen bond as evidenced by Hou et al. ( page 8179, para 2 ) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al. , Spahr et al. and Tao et al. for the carbon layer to be lithophilic and lithium is be chemically bonded to the oxygen containing functional group as taught by Chen et al. and evidenced by Hou et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the combination to arrive at a lithium negative electrode consisting of a metal substrate with a carbon layer with a lithophilic surface which bonds to lithium via chemical bond to suppress dendritic lithium growth improve the performance of the negative electrode in a lithium metal battery . Regarding claim 2, Ranganathan et al. discloses using a photoresist ( AZ4330 , page 277, col. 1, para. 4 ) w hich is a DNQ/ novalac resin ( SDS - Safety data sheet ) positive photoresist material which has a repeat structural unit of cresol-formaldehyde polymer combined with a diazonaphthoquinone sensitizer both of which has more than 40% carbon on an atomic basis. Regarding claim 3, Cheng et al. discloses exposing the uncovered regions of the photosensitive material layer to UV light ( figure 1 ). Regarding claim 6, Ranganathan et al. further discloses pyrolyzing the photosensitive material ( photoresist ) in a hydrogen containing environment at 600-1100 o C ( page 277, col. 2, para. 1 ) . Regarding claim 7, Ranganathan et al. further discloses the XPS analysis of carbon formed by pyrolysis of photosensitive amterial ( photoresist AZ4330 , page 279, col. 2, para. 2, Table III ) has a O/C ratio of 3.5 which amount to 95.5% by weight indicating the carbon layer formed on the surface of the metal substrat e has greater than 95% carbon. Regarding claim 9 , Saphr et al. discloses forming a lithophilic surface on the carbon layer comprises heating in an oxygen -containing process gas at temperatures ranging from 500-1100 o C ( para. 0038 ) which introduces oxygen-containing reactive groups ( carboxyl and hydroxyl group ) on the carbon layer ( para 0133, Table 4 ). Saphr et al. further discloses the Raman spectra indicat ing the change in hybridization of the surface carbon on creation of oxygen-containing functional group on the surface carbon ( figure 1, para 0133 ) . Saphr et al. discloses that the carbon layer has carboxyl and/or hydroxyl groups bonded to the surface, since carbon has a valency of four and the carboxyl and/or hydroxyl groups are being bonded to the surface of carbon layer by a substantially similar method as disclosed in the instant specification it would necessarily result in covalent bonds. Regarding claim 10, Cheng et al. further discloses deposition of lithium metal on the metal substrate ( para. 0075 ). Tao et al. discloses incorporating lithium by placing flat on the surface of the molten lithium ( page 2, col. 1, para. 2, figure 1 and supporting information - page 2 ) forming lithium carbon film composite . Regarding claim 11, Cheng et al. discloses the perforations ( pit and/or groove ) to have a depth of 5 µ m~ 5 0µm ( para. 001 7 ). Regarding claim 12, C heng et al. discloses lithium deposition in the plurality of perforations ( depression pattern ) metal substrate ( para . 0021 , 0051 ) . Regarding claim 14, Cheng et al. disclose assembling the lithium negative electrode into a battery ( para . 0054 ) . Claims FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 2 ]" Cheng et al. (WO-2019210673), in view of Ranganathan et al. Photoresist ‐ Derived Carbon for Microelectromechanical..), Spahr et al. (US 2015/0079477), Tao et al. (A surface chemistry approach ...) and Chen et al. ( Lithiophilicity chemistry of heteroatom-doped carbon...) as evidenced by Hou et al. (Lithium bond chemistry...) as applied to claim s FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 3 ]" 1-3, 6, 7, 9- 12, 14 and 15 above, and further in view of Paal et al. ( FILLIN "Insert the additional prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 4 ]" US 4015986 A ) . Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al. , Tao et al. and Chen et al . are relied upon as described above. Regarding claim 4, The combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. fails to disclose the use of a liquid developer to remove the uncovered irradiated regions of the photosensitive material. Paal et al. discloses the use of a patterned resist mask on a metal substrate ( col. 4, lines 44-45 ) comprising coating of a layer of photosensitive material ( novolak resin based positive photoresist ) , exposing it to UV radiation through apertures ( patterned mask ) and developing the exposed region with a liquid developer solution ( Col. 3 lines 37-50 ) to remove the exposed area completely t o leave a patterned resist mask of unexposed resist on the substrate ( abstract, figure 1 , col. 4 lines 27-37 ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date to use a liquid developer to remove the exposed uncovered regions of the photosensitive material on the metal substrate as taught by Paal et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use liquid developer to remove the irradiated exposed regions of the photosensitive material to form better patterns with smaller dimensions. Claim FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 2 ]" Cheng et al. (WO-2019210673), in view of Ranganathan et al. Photoresist ‐ Derived Carbon for Microelectromechanical..), Spahr et al. (US 2015/0079477), Tao et al. (A surface chemistry approach ...) and Chen et al. ( Lithiophilicity chemistry of heteroatom-doped carbon...) as evidenced by Hou et al. (Lithium bond chemistry...) as applied to claim FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 3 ]" 1-3, 6, 7, 9- 12, 14 and 15 above, and further in view of Taylor et al. ( FILLIN "Insert the additional prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 4 ]" US 20050145506 A1 ) . Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al. , Tao et al . and Chen et al. are relied upon as described above. Regarding claim 5, Cheng et al. discloses a metal substrate that is made of copper ( para . 0033 ) . The combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al ., fails to disclose electrochemical etching. Taylor et al. discloses a method of electrochemical etching an exposed part of a copper foil , through a patterned etch resist layer ( abstract, para. 0023 , 0069 ) . The exposed part of the metal layer is etched away ( para 0050 ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. , and use electrochemical etching in step (e) as taught by Taylor et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include electrochemical etching for better profile control to obtain fine lines and spaces with vertical walls and eliminate hazardous chemical. Claim FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 2 ]" Cheng et al. (WO-2019210673), in view of Ranganathan et al. Photoresist ‐ Derived Carbon for Microelectromechanical..), Spahr et al. (US 2015/0079477), Tao et al. (A surface chemistry approach ...) and Chen et al. ( Lithiophilicity chemistry of heteroatom-doped carbon...) as evidenced by Hou et al. (Lithium bond chemistry...) as applied to claim s FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 3 ]" 1-3, 6, 7, 9- 12, 14 and 15 above, and further in view of Donner et al. FILLIN "Insert the additional prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 4 ]" (Fabrication of Optically Transparent...) . Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. are relied upon as described above. R egarding claim 8, Cheng et al. discloses a metal substrate thickness of 10µm – 100µm . The combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. , fails to disclose a carbon layer (h) that has a thickness of greater than or equal to about 10 nm and less than or equal to about 100 nm. Donner et al. disclose s carbon-based optically transparent electrodes ( C-OTEs ) fabricated by pyrolysis at 1000 °C of the photosensitive material ( photoresist AZ 4330 ) on a quartz substrates yield optically transparent carbon films that have thicknesses ranging between 10 and 80 nm ( abstract, page 2816 - col. 1, Table ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. , to have a carbon layer that has thickness of greater than or equal to about 10 nanometers and less than or equal to about 100 nanometer as taught by Donner et al . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the carbon thickness within the range claimed on a copper substrate yield ing mechanically robust carbon film electrodes. Claim FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 2 ]" Cheng et al. (WO-2019210673), in view of Ranganathan et al. Photoresist ‐ Derived Carbon for Microelectromechanical..), Spahr et al. (US 2015/0079477), Tao et al. (A surface chemistry approach ...), Chen et al. ( Lithiophilicity chemistry of heteroatom-doped carbon...) as evidenced by Hou et al. (Lithium bond chemistry...) and Donner et al (Fabrication of Optically transparent...) as applied to claim s FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 3 ]" 1-3, 6, 7, 8- 12, 14 and 15 above, and further in view of FILLIN "Insert the additional prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 4 ]" Dadheech et al. (US 20190237758 A1) . Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al. Tao et al . , Chen et al. and Donner et al. are relied upon as described above. Regarding claim 13, the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al., Chen et al. and Donner et al. fails to disclose a lithium negative metal electrode that has a thickness of greater than or equal to about 1 micrometer to less than or equal to about 30 micrometers. Dadheech et al. discloses a lithium metal battery comprising a lithium-based negative electrode formed by applying lithium to surface treated metal current collector ( para. 00 7 ) . Dadheech et al. further discloses the lithium metal layer disposed in the metal substate has a thickness of greater than or equal to about 1 μm to less than or equal to about 75 μm ( para 0022 ). Dadheech et al. further discloses the metal substrate ( current collector foil ) has a thickness greater than or equal to about 2 μm or equal to about 30 μm ( para. 0013 , 0073 ) . As discussed above Donner et al. discloses a carbon layer fabricated by pyrolysis at 1000 °C of a photosensitive material ( photoresist AZ 4330 ) ha s thicknesses ranging between 10 and 80 nm ( abstract, page 2816, col. 1, Table 1 ) . Thus, t he negative electrode formed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al., Chen et al., Dadheech et al. and Donner et al. would yield a negative electrode in the thickness range as claimed by the applicant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, use method of manufacture of a negative electrode as disclosed by the combination of Cheng et al., Ranganathan et al., Sphar et al., Tao et al. and Chen et al. to have a thickness as taught by Donner et al. and Dadheech et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the electrode thickness in this range for use in high energy electrochemical cells that can minimize diminished performance over time and increase energy density. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ISWARYA MATHEW whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9515 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-1490 . 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. /I.M./ Iswarya Mathew Examiner, Art Unit 1788 03/11/2026 /Alicia Chevalier/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1788