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 ..
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 11, 13, 20-22 and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherstyuk (US 20170005497) in view of Bae (US 20160056644) and in further view of Albertus (US 20160093904 ) and in further view of Takahashi (US 20140342219 ).
Regarding claim 1, Sherstyuk teaches a method for ultrasonically vibrating a metal negative electrode (paragraph [0095] teaches a system which uses a vibration transducer on electrodes within a battery utilizing ultrasonic technology),
comprising providing an electrochemical cell (figures 1A-E shows battery cells),
vibrating the metal negative electrode ultrasonically ([0095] teaches a vibration transducer vibrating the electrodes in the battery); and
charging the electrochemical cell, wherein the vibrating and charging occur simultaneously (paragraph [0094] discloses wherein vibrations are applied as vibration pulses used for charging the battery, thus vibration and charging are performed simultaneously).
Sherstyuk does not explicitly teach wherein the electrochemical cell comprises: a positive electrode, a solid electrolyte, and a metal negative electrode.
Bae teaches wherein the electrochemical cell comprises: a positive electrode, a solid electrolyte, and a metal negative electrode (paragraph [0039] teaches wherein the electrochemical cell, battery banks, includes a positive electrode, a solid electrolyte, and a metal negative electrode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyukuk reference with the charging system of the Bae reference so that the lifetime of the batteries may be easily extended.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Bae reference in [0003] wherein the lifetime of batteries is extended.
Sherstyuk and Bae do not explicitly teach wherein the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode.
Albertus teaches wherein the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of Lithium metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Sherstyuk, Bae, and Albertus do not explicitly teach wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte.
Takahashi teaches wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte (defined in paragraph [0131] wherein the solid electrolyte includes a sulfide-based electrolyte).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae and Albertus references with the electrode system of the Takahashi reference so that the battery’s capacity may be restored when there is a decrease in capacity.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0019] wherein the battery’s capacity is restored.
Regarding claim 2, Sherstyuk teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the charging occurs at a temperature lower than 80° C., 75° C., 65° C., 60° C., 55° C., 50° C., 45° C., 40° C., 35° C., 30° C., 25° C., 20° C., 15° C., 10° C., 5° C., 0° C., −5° C., −10° C., −15° C., −20° C., −25° C., or −30° C ([0046] discloses wherein the battery may be charged in temperatures up to 65° C).
Regarding claim 3, Sherstyuk teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the charging occurs at a temperature at least higher than −30° C ([0046] discloses wherein the battery may be charged in temperatures up to 65° C).
Regarding claim 5, Sherstyuk and Bae teach the method of claim 1, but do not explicitly teach wherein the metal negative electrode is a sodium (Na) metal negative electrode.
Albertus teaches wherein the metal negative electrode is a sodium (Na) metal negative electrode (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of sodium metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Regarding claim 6, Sherstyuk and Bae teach the method of claim 1, but do not explicitly teach wherein the metal negative electrode is a zinc (Zn) metal negative electrode.
Albertus teaches wherein the metal negative electrode is a zinc (Zn) metal negative electrode (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of zinc metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Regarding claim 11, Sherstyuk, Bae and Albertus teach the method of claim 1, but do not explicitly teach wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte.
Takahashi teaches wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte (defined in paragraph [0131] wherein the solid electrolyte includes a sulfide-based electrolyte).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk reference with the electrode system of the Takahashi reference so that the battery’s capacity may be restored when there is a decrease in capacity.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0019] wherein the battery’s capacity is restored.
Regarding claim 13, Sherstyuk teaches a method of charging a battery having a metal negative electrode (paragraph [0095] teaches a system which uses a vibration transducer on electrodes within a battery utilizing ultrasonic technology),
the method comprising providing a battery having less than a full charge (figures 1A-E shows battery cells);
vibrating the battery at ultrasonic frequencies ([0095] teaches a vibration transducer vibrating the electrodes in the battery); and
charging the battery, wherein the vibrating and charging occur concurrently (paragraph [0094] discloses wherein vibrations are applied as vibration pulses used for charging the battery, thus vibration and charging are performed simultaneously).
Sherstyuk does not explicitly teach a metal negative electrode.
Bae teaches a metal negative electrode (paragraph [0039] teaches wherein the electrochemical cell, battery banks, includes a positive electrode, a solid electrolyte, and a metal negative electrode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyukuk reference with the charging system of the Bae reference so that the lifetime of the batteries may be easily extended.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Bae reference in [0003] wherein the lifetime of batteries is extended.
Sherstyuk and Bae do not explicitly teach wherein the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode.
Albertus teaches wherein the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of Lithium metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Sherstyuk, Bae, and Albertus do not explicitly teach wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte.
Takahashi teaches wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte (defined in paragraph [0131] wherein the solid electrolyte includes a sulfide-based electrolyte).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae and Albertus references with the electrode system of the Takahashi reference so that the battery’s capacity may be restored when there is a decrease in capacity.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0019] wherein the battery’s capacity is restored.
Regarding claim 20, Sherstyuk teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the method further comprises measuring an electrochemical cell's voltage, current, impedance, resistance, pressure, temperature, evolved gases, or physical deformations ([0046] discloses wherein the battery may be charged in temperatures up to 65° C).
Regarding claim 21, Sherstyuk and Bae teaches a electrochemical cell but does not explicitly teach having a Li-metal negative electrode made by the method of claim 1.
Albertus teaches having a Li-metal negative electrode made by the method of claim 1 (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of Lithium metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Regarding claim 22, Sherstyuk and Bae teach the electrochemical cell but does not explicitly teach having a Li-metal negative electrode healed by the method of claim 1.
Albertus teaches having a Li-metal negative electrode healed by the method of claim 1 (defined in [0038] wherein the negative electrode may be formed of Lithium metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Regarding claim 24, Sherstyuk teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the electrochemical cell is in a battery (figures 1A-E shows battery cells).
Regarding claim 25, Sherstyuk and Bae teach the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the battery is in a car.
Albertus teaches wherein the battery is in a car (paragraph [0030] disclose wherein the batteries are comprised within a car or a vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Regarding claim 26, Sherstyuk and Bae teach the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the battery is in use in a car.
Albertus teaches wherein the battery is in a car (paragraph [0030] disclose wherein the batteries are comprised within a car or a vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Albertus reference so that the battery capacity is increased.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Albertus reference in paragraph [0005] wherein battery capacity is increased.
Claims 8 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ) in view of Bae (US 20160056644) and in further view of Albertus (US 20160093904 ) and in further view of Takahashi (US 20140342219 ) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Balogh (US 20160181594 ).
Regarding claim 8, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus and Takahashi teach the method of claim 1, but do not explicitly teach further comprising applying a pressure to the metal negative electrode.
Balogh teaches comprising applying a pressure to the metal negative electrode (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Regarding claim 9 Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus and Takahashi teach the method of claim 8, but do not explicitly teach wherein the applied pressure is at least 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 pounds per square inch (PSI).
Balogh teaches wherein the applied pressure is at least 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 pounds per square inch (PSI) (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Regarding claim 10, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus and Takahashi teach the method of claim 8, but do not explicitly teach wherein the applied pressure is less than 600, 500, 400, 300, 200, 100, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, or 10 PSI.
Balogh teaches wherein the applied pressure is less than 600, 500, 400, 300, 200, 100, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, or 10 PSI (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable ) in view of Bae (US 20160056644) and in further view of Albertus (US 20160093904 ) and in further view of Takahashi (US 20140342219) as applied to claim 13 and in further view of Balogh (US 20160181594 ).
Regarding claim 15, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi teach the method of claim 13, but does not explicitly teach further comprising applying a pressure to the metal negative electrode.
Balogh teaches comprising applying a pressure to the metal negative electrode (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Regarding claim 16, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi teach the method of claim 13, but does not explicitly teach wherein the applied pressure is at least 10 pounds per square inch (PSI), 20 PSI, 30 PSI, 40 PSI, 50 PSI, 60 PSI 70 PSI, 80 PSI, 90 PSI, 100 PSI, 200 PSI, 300, PSI 400 PSI, 500 PSI, 600 PSI, 700 PSI, 800 PSI, 900 PSI, 1000 PSI, 2000 PSI, 3000 PSI, or 4000 PSI.
Balogh teaches wherein the applied pressure is at least 10 pounds per square inch (PSI), 20 PSI, 30 PSI, 40 PSI, 50 PSI, 60 PSI 70 PSI, 80 PSI, 90 PSI, 100 PSI, 200 PSI, 300, PSI 400 PSI, 500 PSI, 600 PSI, 700 PSI, 800 PSI, 900 PSI, 1000 PSI, 2000 PSI, 3000 PSI, or 4000 PSI (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Regarding claim 17, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi teach the method of claim 13, but does not explicitly teach wherein the applied pressure is less than 600 PSI, 500 PSI, 400 PSI, 300 PSI, 200 PSI, 100 PSI, 80 PSI, 70 PSI, 60 PSI, 50 PSI, 40 PSI, 30 PSI, 20 PSI, or 10 PSI.
Balogh teaches wherein the applied pressure is less than 600 PSI, 500 PSI, 400 PSI, 300 PSI, 200 PSI, 100 PSI, 80 PSI, 70 PSI, 60 PSI, 50 PSI, 40 PSI, 30 PSI, 20 PSI, or 10 PSI (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk and Bae references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Regarding claim 18, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi teach the method of claim 17, but does not explicitly teach where the applied pressure is 300 PSI or less.
Balogh teaches where the applied pressure is 300 PSI or less (paragraph [0058] discloses wherein pressure is applied to the negative electrode with a pressure equal to about 15psi -2900psi).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi references with the electrode system of the Balogh reference so that the capacity fade is minimized.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Balogh reference in paragraph [0009] wherein capacity fade is minimized.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherstyuk (US 20170005497) in view of Bae (US 20160056644) and in further view of Albertus (US 20160093904 ) and in further view of Takahashi (US 20140342219) and in further view of Nishi (US 20150037620).
Regarding claim 19, Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi teach the method of claim 13, but does not explicitly teach wherein the current at which the charging occurs is at least 1 mA/cm2, 2 mA/cm2, 3 mA/cm2, 4 mA/cm2, 5 mA/cm2, 6 mA/cm2, or 10 mA/cm2.
Nishi teaches wherein the current at which the charging occurs is at least the charging occurs is at least 1 mA/cm2, 2 mA/cm2, 3 mA/cm2, 4 mA/cm2, 5 mA/cm2, 6 mA/cm2, or 10 mA/cm2 (defined in paragraph [0425] wherein charging is performed at least 1 mA/cm2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi references with the electrode system of the Nishi reference so that the battery state is stabilized during charging.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nishi reference in paragraph [425] wherein battery state is stabilized.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, the applicant argues that there is no suggestion to combine the Sherstyuk, Bae, Albertus, Takahashi and Balogh references. The applicant argues that there is no motivation to incorporate a sonification device with solid state batteries since such a device is likely to reduce energy density per weight or per volume. The applicant argues that there is no suggestion to combine the teachings of the Albertus reference since, one skilled in the art would expect a sonification device could potentially fracture a brittle solid electrolyte in a solid state battery, resulting in device failure. The applicant argues that there is no teaching or suggestion in Albertus that would enable one skilled in the art on how to incorporate a lithium metal negative electrode into the system of Sherstyuk without fracture or device failure, much less that such incorporation would reduce inhomogeneities within the Li-metal negative electrode which reduce ionic conduction through the Li-metal negative electrode. This argument is not persuasive.
Firstly, the arguments concerning dendrites, SEI growth, pressure, energy density, inhomogeneity and ionic conduction are not recited, thus, not required by the claim. Secondly, Claim 1 discloses, “a method for ultrasonically vibrating a metal negative electrode comprising providing an electrochemical cell…vibrating the metal negative electrode ultrasonically; and charging the electrochemical cell, wherein vibrating and charging occur simultaneously.” Sherstyuk reference teaches (defined in paragraph [0085] a battery system which uses alternative energy sources, such as vibration to charge and discharge batteries. Thus, vibrating and charging are occurring simultaneously. Paragraph [0095] discloses wherein the vibrating is done ultrasonically. Sherstyuk [0008] discloses a system which provides vibration to a battery system including polymeric electrolytes, which includes electrochemical cells. Sherstyuk paragraph [0099] discloses using the vibration to greatly reduce a formation such as SEI layer growth).
Sherstyuk discloses a system which charges an electrochemical cell or a battery with vibration in order to reduce the formation of SEI growth but does not teach the claimed composition of the electrochemical cell, including, the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode; a solid electrolyte, wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte. The references, Bae, Albertus, and Takahashi explicitly disclose known composition of electrochemical cells, including a positive electrode, a solid electrode, , including, the metal negative electrode is a lithium (Li) metal negative electrode; a solid electrolyte, wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte, a garnet-based electrolyte, or a borohydride-based electrolyte. The rejection does not rely on Bae, Albertus, and Takehashi to provide vibration to the electrochemical cell, just merely the component within an electrochemical cell. Bae, Albertus and Takehashi disclose known electrochemical cell compositions which may be combined within the Sherstyuk system.
Thus, for these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 20120070720 A1 Battery And Ultrasonic Bonding Aizawa; Takahiro Et Al.
Us 20170033572 A1 Capacity Estimation In A Secondary Battery Becker; Jens Et Al.
Us 20210376394 A1 Electrochemical Energy Storage Devices Bradwell; David J. Et Al.
Us 20200169193 A1 An Accessory System Garcia Marchon; Oscar
Us 20150185963 A1 Display Device Lee; Tae Hee Et Al.
Us 5629599 Communication Device Integral Vibrating Malaspina; Francis P. Et Al.
Us 20180248220 A1 Nonaqueous Electrolyte Batteries Manabe; Noriko Et Al.
Us 6558841 B1 Negative Electrode Nakagiri; Yasushi Et Al.
Us 9399404 B2 Charging System For All-Solid-State Battery Ose; Norihiro Et Al.
Us 20080074002 A1 Piezoelectric Energy Harvester Priya; Shashank Et Al.
Us 20100273059 A1 Lithium Primary Sano; Yoko
Us 20190081559 A1 Energy Harvesting Systems And Methods Seshia; Ashwin Et Al.
Us 20170155127 A1 All-Solid-State Battery System Shindo; Yohei Et Al.
Us 20160380315 A1 Battery Systems Weicker; Phil Et Al.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS B PACHECO whose telephone number is (571)272-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:30.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
ALEXIS BOATENG PACHECO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/ALEXIS B PACHECO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights