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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made to applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 7, 9, 14, 17 and 19 filed on 07/20/2026. Claims 8 and 18have been canceled. Claim 25-26 are newly submitted claims. Accordingly, claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, 17, and 19-26 remain pending and are claims addressed and examined below.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 and 14 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections previously set forth in the office action mailed on 06/08/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7-8, filed 07/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, 7, 9-15, 17, and 19-24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kuwajima et al. (US-20220328879-A1) and Takehara et al. (US-20200388887-A1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 10-15, 17, and 20-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuwajima et al. (US-20220328879-A1) in view of Takehara et al. (US-20200388887-A1).
With regards to claim 1, Kuwajima teaches a battery cell (¶ 0021) comprising: C cathode electrodes comprising a cathode current collector and a cathode active material layer (¶ 0476). Kuwajima teaches a positive electrode which reads C being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima also teaches A anode electrodes comprising an anode current collector and an anode active material layer (¶ 0531). Kuwajima teaches a negative electrode which reads on A being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima teaches S separators (¶ 0558). Kuwajima teaches a separator which reads on S being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima goes on to teach an electrolyte comprising phosphorus containing aids (other aids) (¶ 0395 and ¶ 0404). Kuwajima teaches that these phosphorus containing compounds may include tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) which is a TFEP derivative (¶ 0404). Kuwajima teaches that the amount of the phosphorus containing compounds (other aids) blended is not limited (¶ 0408).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to blend two of the phosphorus containing compounds such as the tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and the bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (TFEP derivative) in the electrolyte with no unpredictable results. Although modified Kuwajima teaches that the additive may include tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and a TFEP derivative such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (¶ 0404), Kuwajima does not specifically teach a TFEP derivative, wherein the TFEP derivative includes methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate.
Similar to Kuwajima, Takehara teaches an electrolytic solution that includes a phosphorus-containing compound (¶ 0099). Takehara teaches that the inclusion of a phosphorus-containing compound in the electrolyte improves endurance characteristics of a battery in which the electrolyte is utilized (¶ 0099). In ¶ 0100 and ¶ 0104, Takehara teaches that the phosphorus-containing compound may be a phosphonate ester such as methyl bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphonoacetate which is a TFEP derivative and reads on methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate. Similar to Kuwajima, Takehara also teaches that two or more types of the phosphorus-containing compound may be included in the electrolyte (¶ 0106).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute the TFEP derivative (bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate)) in the electrolyte taught by Kuwajima with the TFEP derivative (methyl bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphonoacetate) taught by Takehara as this would predictably result in a battery with enhanced battery characteristics. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Kuwajima goes on to teach that the electrolyte comprises a solvent that may include a fluorinated cyclic carbonate such as FEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0044 and ¶ 0105). Kuwajima teaches that the solvent may also include a non-fluorinated chain carbonate such as DEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0043 and ¶ 0110). Kuwajima does not specifically teach that the electrolyte includes a ratio of FEC to DEC in a range from 1:1 to 1:9.
However, Kuwajima teaches that the fluorinated cyclic carbonate may be included in an amount of 5% to 90% by volume (¶ 0108). Kuwajima also teaches that the non-fluorinated chain carbonate may be included in an amount of 10 to 90% by volume (¶ 0112). As mentioned earlier, in ¶ 0105, Kuwajima teaches FEC as an example of the fluorinated cyclic carbonate, and in ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DEC as an example of the non-fluorinated chain carbonate. Kuwajima goes on to teach an example in which FEC, DMC and a fluorine containing ether are combined in a 20:40:40 ratio (¶ 0588). In ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DMC, along with DEC, as a suitable chain carbonates that may be utilized in the electrolyte.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute the DMC in the example taught by Kuwajima with DEC in the 20:40:40 ratio taught by Kuwajima as they are both taught as suitable chain carbonates that may be included in the electrolyte and will yield no unpredictable results. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Through these modification, modified Kuwajima teaches phosphorus containing additive including tris(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and a TFEP derivative, wherein the TFEP derivative includes methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate; fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC); and diethyl carbonate (DEC),wherein the electrolyte includes FEC and DEC in a 20:40 ratio which falls with the claimed range of 1:1 to 1:9. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 2, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 7, wherein the electrolyte further comprises lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) (¶ 0224 - ¶ 0225).
With regards to claim 3, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 2, wherein the LiPF6 comprises 0.5 molar LiPF6 (¶ 0236).
With regards to claim 7, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte comprises 0.01wt% to 5wt% of the phosphorus containing aids which includes TFEP and the TFEP derivative (bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (¶ 0404 and ¶ 0408). Through the modification discussed above, modified Kuwajima teaches that the TFEP derivative is methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate. The 0.01wt% to 5wt% range taught by Kuwajima overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5wt% to 2.5wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 10, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1, wherein the anode active material layer comprises graphite and one or more materials selected from a group consisting of silicon , silicon/carbon composite, silicon oxide, and lithium silicon oxide (¶ 0533 and ¶ 0536 - ¶ 0538).
With regards to claim 11, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 10, wherein the C cathode electrodes have an operating voltage greater than 4.2V (¶ 0494; 4.4V or higher).
With regards to claim 12, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1, wherein the cathode active material layer includes one or more materials selected from a group consisting of lithium and manganese-rich (LMR) particles and lithium nickel manganese oxide (LNMO) particles (¶ 0477 - ¶ 0492).
With regards to claim 13, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte further comprises LiPO2F2, (¶ 0462 and ¶ 0464). Kuwajima teaches that the LiPO2F2 is 0.001wt% to 20wt% of the electrolyte, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5wt% to 1.5wt% (¶ 0467).In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 14, Kuwajima teaches a battery cell (¶ 0021) comprising: C cathode electrodes comprising a cathode current collector and a cathode active material layer (¶ 0476). Kuwajima teaches a positive electrode which reads C being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima also teaches A anode electrodes comprising an anode current collector and an anode active material layer (¶ 0531). Kuwajima teaches a negative electrode which reads on A being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima teaches S separators (¶ 0558). Kuwajima teaches a separator which reads on S being an integer greater than zero. Kuwajima goes on to teach an electrolyte comprising lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) (¶ 0224 - ¶ 0225). Kuwajima teaches that the electrolyte comprises a solvent that may include a fluorinated cyclic carbonate such as FEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0044 and ¶ 0105). Kuwajima also teaches that the solvent may include a non-fluorinated chain carbonate such as DEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0043 and ¶ 0110). Kuwajima goes on to teach an electrolyte comprising phosphorus containing aids (other aids) (¶ 0395 and ¶ 0404). Kuwajima teaches that these phosphorus containing compounds may include tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) which is a TFEP derivative (¶ 0404). Kuwajima teaches that the amount of the phosphorus containing compounds (other aids) blended is not limited (¶ 0408).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to blend two of the phosphorus containing compounds taught by Kuwajima such as the tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and the bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (TFEP derivative) in the electrolyte with no unpredictable results. Although modified Kuwajima teaches that the additive may include tris(2,2,2- trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and a TFEP derivative such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (¶ 0404), Kuwajima does not specifically teach a TFEP derivative, wherein the TFEP derivative includes methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate.
Similar to Kuwajima, Takehara teaches an electrolytic solution that includes a phosphorus-containing compound (¶ 0099). Takehara teaches that the inclusion of a phosphorus-containing compound in the electrolyte improves endurance characteristics of a battery in which the electrolyte is utilized (¶ 0099). In ¶ 0100 and ¶ 0104, Takehara teaches that the phosphorus-containing compound may be a phosphonate ester such as methyl bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphonoacetate which is a TFEP derivative and reads on methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate. Similar to Kuwajima, Takehara also teaches that two or more types of the phosphorus-containing compound may be included in the electrolyte (¶ 0106).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute the TFEP derivative (bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate)) in the electrolyte taught by Kuwajima with the TFEP derivative (methyl bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphonoacetate) taught by Takehara as this would predictably result in a battery with enhanced battery characteristics. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
As discussed above, Kuwajima teaches that the electrolyte may include a fluorinated cyclic carbonate such as FEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0044 and ¶ 0105), and a non-fluorinated chain carbonate such as DEC (¶ 0041 - ¶ 0043 and ¶ 0110). Kuwajima does not specifically teach that the electrolyte includes a ratio of FEC to DEC in a range from 1:1 to 1:9.
However, Kuwajima teaches that the fluorinated cyclic carbonate may be included in an amount of 5% to 90% by volume (¶ 0108). Kuwajima also teaches that the non-fluorinated chain carbonate may be included in an amount of 10 to 90% by volume (¶ 0112). As mentioned earlier, in ¶ 0105, Kuwajima teaches FEC as an example of the fluorinated cyclic carbonate, and in ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DEC as an example of the non-fluorinated chain carbonate. Kuwajima goes on to teach an example in which FEC, DMC and a fluorine containing ether are combined in a 20:40:40 ratio (¶ 0588). In ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DMC, along with DEC, as a suitable chain carbonates that may be utilized in the electrolyte.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute the DMC in the example taught by Kuwajima with DEC in the 20:40:40 ratio taught by Kuwajima as they are both taught as suitable chain carbonates that may be included in the electrolyte and will yield no unpredictable results. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Through these modification, modified Kuwajima teaches phosphorus containing additive including tris(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphate (TFEP) and a TFEP derivative, wherein the TFEP derivative includes methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate; fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC); and diethyl carbonate (DEC),wherein the electrolyte includes FEC and DEC in a 20:40 ratio which falls with the claimed range of 1:1 to 1:9. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 15, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the LiPF6 comprises 0.5 molar LiPF6 (¶ 0236).
With regards to claim 17, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the electrolyte comprises 0.01wt% to 5wt% of the phosphorus containing aids which includes TFEP and the TFEP derivative (bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)methyl phosphate) (¶ 0404 and ¶ 0408). Through the modification discussed above, modified Kuwajima teaches that the TFEP derivative is methyl P,P- bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate. The 0.01wt% to 5wt% range taught by Kuwajima overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5wt% to 2.5wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 20, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the electrolyte further comprises LiPO2F2, (¶ 0462 and ¶ 0464). Kuwajima teaches that the LiPO2F2 is 0.001wt% to 20wt% of the electrolyte, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5wt% to 1.5wt% (¶ 0467).In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 21, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the anode active material layer comprises graphite and one or more materials selected from a group consisting of silicon , silicon/carbon composite, silicon oxide, and lithium silicon oxide (¶ 0533 and ¶ 0536 - ¶ 0538).
With regards to claim 22, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 21, wherein the cathode active material layer includes one or more materials selected from a group consisting of lithium and manganese-rich (LMR) particles and lithium nickel manganese oxide (LNMO) particles (¶ 0477 - ¶ 0492).
With regards to claim 23, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the C cathode electrodes have an operating voltage greater than 4.2V (¶ 0494; 4.4V or higher).
With regards to claim 24, Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14, wherein the cathode active material layer includes one or more materials selected from a group consisting of lithium and manganese-rich (LMR) particles and lithium nickel manganese oxide (LNMO) particles (¶ 0477 - ¶ 0492).
With regards to claim 25, modified Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14. As discussed above, Kuwajima teaches that the fluorinated cyclic carbonate may be included in an amount of 5% to 90% by volume (¶ 0108). Kuwajima also teaches that the non-fluorinated chain carbonate may be included in an amount of 10% to 90% by volume (¶ 0112). As mentioned earlier, in ¶ 0105, Kuwajima teaches FEC as an example of the fluorinated cyclic carbonate, and in ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DEC as an example of the non-fluorinated chain carbonate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to include FEC in an amount such as 10% and DEC in an amount such as 10% with no unpredictable results as these amounts are within the workable range taught by Kuwajima. With the FEC and DEC included in an amount of 10% each, the FEC to DEC ratio is 1:1.
With regards to claim 26, modified Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1. As discussed above, Kuwajima teaches that the fluorinated cyclic carbonate may be included in an amount of 5% to 90% by volume (¶ 0108). Kuwajima also teaches that the non-fluorinated chain carbonate may be included in an amount of 10% to 90% by volume (¶ 0112). As mentioned earlier, in ¶ 0105, Kuwajima teaches FEC as an example of the fluorinated cyclic carbonate, and in ¶ 0110, Kuwajima teaches DEC as an example of the non-fluorinated chain carbonate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to include FEC in an amount such as 10% and DEC in an amount such as 10% with no unpredictable results as these amounts are within the workable range taught by Kuwajima. With the FEC and DEC included in an amount of 10% each, the FEC to DEC ratio is 1:1.
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuwajima et al. (US-20220328879-A1) in view of Takehara et al. (US-20200388887-A1) as applied to claim 1 and 14 above and in further view of Schmitz et al. (US-20190067734-A1).
With regards to claim 9, modified Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 1. Modified Kuwajima teaches that the electrolyte may include two or more phosphorus-containing compounds (Kuwajima: ¶ 0408 and Takehara: ¶ 0106 ). However, modified Kuwajima does not specifically teach that the TFEP derivative further includes one or more materials selected from a group consisting of tris(2,2,3,3,3-pentafluoropropyl)phosphate, bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate, and methyl P,P-bis(2,2,2 trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Schmitz teaches a similar battery cell comprising organic phosphorous additives (¶ 0063). Similar to Kuwajima, Schmitz teaches tris(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphate as an additive (¶ 0064). Schmitz goes on to teach more phosphorus additives such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate (¶ 0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to include a phosphorus additive, such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate, as taught by Schmitz in the electrolyte taught by Kuwajima as there are no unpredictable results. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re
Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
With regards to claim 19, modified Kuwajima teaches the battery cell of claim 14. Modified Kuwajima teaches that the electrolyte may include two or more phosphorus-containing compounds (Kuwajima: ¶ 0408 and Takehara: ¶ 0106 ). However, modified Kuwajima does not specifically teach that the TFEP derivative further includes one or more materials selected from a group consisting of tris(2,2,3,3,3-pentafluoropropyl)phosphate, bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate, and methyl P,P-bis(2,2,2 trifluoroethyl)phosphonoacetate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Schmitz teaches a similar battery cell comprising organic phosphorous additives (¶ 0063). Similar to Kuwajima, Schmitz teaches tris(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphate as an additive (¶ 0064). Schmitz goes on to teach more phosphorus additives such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate (¶ 0064).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to include a phosphorus additive, such as bis(2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) methyl phosphonate, as taught by Schmitz in the electrolyte taught by Kuwajima as there are no unpredictable results. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re
Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNSUYADOR YUSIF whose telephone number is (571)272-4531. The examiner can normally be reached 7 am - 5 pm (M-R).
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, Galen H Hauth can be reached at (571) 270-5516. 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.
/HUNSUYADOR MUGEESATU YUSIF/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
