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 .
Drawings
The objections to the Drawings are withdrawn in view of the amendments to
the Claim 5.
Claim Objections
The objections to the Claims 2-16 are withdrawn in view of the amendments to
the Claims 2-5, 7-10, 16.
Claims 6-12, 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6, in line 1-2, recites “The electrowetting thermosyphon assembly of claim 1, further comprising a heat generating electronic component disposed on the exterior surface of the thermosyphon”, to avoid antecedent issues, “disposed on the exterior surface of the thermosyphon” should be changed to read “disposed on an exterior surface of the thermosyphon”.
Claim 11, in line 3, recites “The electrowetting thermosyphon assembly of claim 1, wherein the electrowetting thermosyphon assembly further comprises… to transport the liquid to the evaporator surface”, to avoid antecedent issues, “to transport the liquid to the evaporator surface” should be change to read “to transport the liquid to an evaporator surface”.
Claim 12, in line 1, recites “A method of cooling electronic components using…”, to avoid antecedent issues, the limitations should be change to read “A method of cooling an electronic components using…”.
Claim 15, recites “A method… comprising: introducing heat into the assembly from a heat generating electronic component…; disposed on the surface of the thermosyphon comprises…”, to avoid antecedent issues, the limitations should be change to read “A method… comprising: introducing a heat into the electrowetting thermosyphon assembly from a heat generating electronic component…; disposed on a surface of the thermosyphon comprises…”.
With respect to Claim 7-10 are also objected to since they depend on Claim 6 and inherit the deficiency therein.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is 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.
Per Applicant’s Specifications, in paragraph [0050] recites “In certain embodiments, when the ambient temperature is less than about 10°C, a Peltier cooler disposed between an electronic component and the thermosyphon 101 within the assembly 100 can generate electricity. Under conditions where electricity is generated by the Peltier cooler via the Seebeck effect, the temperature at the junction between the Peltier cooler and the electronic component is converted to additional power… Furthermore, the assembly configuration in FIG. 2 in power generation mode, provides added power via the Seebeck effect. Added power from the Peltier cooler can provide at least some of the driving voltage for the electrowetting process”.
Per Applicant’s remark filed 01/02/2026, page 6-7, recites “Additional heat generated from the heat generating electronic component is converted to electricity via the Seebeck effect by the Peltier cooler. The generated electricity may then be used to heat the liquid and vapor in the thermosyphon”.
It is unclear how the Applicant intends to use the electricity generated by the peltier via the Seebeck effect, the specifications states “provide at least some of the driving voltage for the electrowetting process” and the Applicant’s remark states “used to heat the liquid and vapor in the thermosyphon” and the Claim limitations of Claim 16 “the electricity generated from the Peltier cooler is used to maintain a temperature at a base of the heat generating electronic component” is rendered indefinite as the Claim limitations do not specific how the electricity is to be used.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal (US 6,474,074 - hereinafter, "Ghoshal") in view of Bahadur et al. (US 2017/0074603 – hereinafter, “Bahadur”) in view of Ludwig (US 2012/0204577 – hereinafter, “Ludwig”).
With respect to Claim 1, Ghoshal teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
An thermosyphon assembly comprising:
a liquid (liquid state (130));
a vapor (vapor state (130));
a thermosyphon (140) that is operative to contain a two phase coolant (130) comprising the liquid (liquid state (130)) and the vapor (vapor state (130));
a condenser (160) that is in fluid communication with the two phase coolant (130) and is operative to cool the vapor (vapor state (130)) within the thermosyphon (140); wherein the condenser (160) is a heat sink (120) with a finned area (see Figure 3, 7A-7B) to facilitate heat dissipation (in column 6, line 66 to column 7, line 1, “There, the heat is transferred to the heat sink 760 which dissipates the heat to the ambient air”); and
a peltier cooler (740) located atop (on a surface) the thermosyphon (750+770+780, see Figure 7A-7B).
Ghoshal fails to specifically teach or suggest an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and an electrowetting electrode that is operative to provide a driving voltage for electrowetting of the liquid downstream of the condenser within an interior of the thermosyphon; wherein the driving voltage is generated by a peltier cooler; where the peltier cooler operates in a power generation mode using Seebeck effect.
Bahadur, however, teaches (in Figure 3A-3B) an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and an electrowetting electrode (pumping electrodes, see Figure 3A-3B, in paragraph [0022], “At condenser 302, discrete liquid droplets are “electrically” pinched from the condensed pool (see sections 305A-305B) and pumped towards evaporator 301 in liquid conduits 303 by sequentially actuating a series of underlying electrodes, such as electrodes 203 shown in device 200 of FIG. 2”) that is operative to provide a driving voltage for electrowetting (in paragraph [0025]) of the liquid downstream (see Figure 3A-3B) of the condenser (302) within an interior of the thermosyphon (300).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Bahadur with Ghoshal, such that an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and an electrowetting electrode that is operative to provide a driving voltage for electrowetting of the liquid downstream of the condenser within an interior of the thermosyphon as taught by Bahadur since doing so would improve heat dissipation through propelling the droplet motion through electrowetting and allows transportation of fluid against gravity over long distances. (in paragraph [0023])
With respect to the limitation requiring wherein the driving voltage is generated by a peltier cooler; where the peltier cooler operates in a power generation mode using Seebeck effect.
Ludwig, however, teaches (in paragraph [0308] to paragraph [0310])
wherein a driving voltage (electricity, in paragraph [0310], “In Seebeck mode, traditional thermoelectric devices made with traditional thermoelectric materials convert approximately 10 percent of thermal energy to electricity”) is generated by a peltier cooler (thermoelectric device); where the peltier cooler (thermoelectric device) operates in a power generation mode (Seebeck (heat-to-power conversion) mode, in paragraph [0308]) using Seebeck effect (in paragraph [0168], “the phenomenon in traditional Seebeck effect thermoelectric devices wherein simple heat conduction heat flow (thicker vertical arrows) provides a dominant path for heat flow, leaving far less heat to actually drive the electron flow (thinner vertical arrows) that creates a Seebeck effect electric current”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ludwig with Bahadur, such that a driving voltage is generated by a peltier cooler; where the peltier cooler operates in a power generation mode using Seebeck effect as taught by Ludwig since doing so would create a system for Ghosal’s thermosyphon and Bahadur’s electrowetting thermosyphon assembly, creating an active heat pipe, and Ludwig’s peltier also provides heat transfer, heat-to-electricity conversion, temperature flux measurements for use in interfacing integrated circuit packages. (in paragraph [0055] to paragraph [0056] and in paragraph [0314])
With respect to Claim 2, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 1 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the two phase coolant (130) is transported within conduits (vapor channels + capillary region, in column 3, lines 27-34, “The vapor travels through vapor channels in the capillary region 220 to the condenser region 225. A heat sink associated with the condenser region 225 absorbs the heat from the vapor causing the vapor to change states back into a liquid state. The condensation of the transport fluid is then returned to the evaporator region 210 via capillaries in the capillary region 220”) within the thermosyphon (140).
With respect to Claim 6, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 1 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
further comprising a heat generating electronic component (110) disposed on an exterior surface (See Figure 3 and Figure 7A-7B) of the thermosyphon (140) wherein an area of the thermosyphon (140) heated by the heat generating electronic component (110, chip, in column 3, lines 3-12, “The evaporator region 210 serves to transfer heat from a heat source to a transport fluid which is used to transport the heat to a heat sink. The heat source may be any type of device that is capable of generating heat. In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, the heat source is a hot integrated circuit chip. The heat source is placed on the back side of the evaporator region 210 such that heat from the heat source is transferred from the heat source to elements in the evaporator region 210, which in turn transfer the heat to the transport fluid.”) is an evaporator area (210).
With respect to Claim 7, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 6 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the evaporator area (210), the condenser (225) and the electrowetting electrode (as taught by Bahadur in Claim 1 as per above, in Figure 3A, electrowetting electrode (306) is in the evaporation section (301)) are arranged in a recycle loop (see Figure 3, the recycle loop can be seen and the recycle loop would be follow the same pattern for Figure 5 and further expanded to the implementation as shown in Figure 7A-7B).
With respect to Claim 9, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 6 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the electrowetting thermosyphon assembly further comprises a Peltier cooler (740, in column 6, lines 59-64, “The portion of the heat pipe structures 750 that is adjacent to the thermoelectric coolers is the evaporator region. Heat expelled from the thermoelectric coolers is absorbed by the elements in the evaporator region of the heat pipe structure, thereby causing transport fluid in the evaporator region to change to a vapor.”) operative to cool the heat generating electronic component (730) wherein the Peltier cooler (740, see Figure 7A) is disposed between the thermosyphon (750) and the heat generating electronic component (730).
With respect to Claim 10, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 6 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the Peltier cooler (740) is operative to generate power (Seebeck (heat-to-power conversion) mode, as taught in Claim 1 as per above by Ludwig, in paragraph [0308] and in paragraph [0310], “In Seebeck mode, traditional thermoelectric devices made with traditional thermoelectric materials convert approximately 10 percent of thermal energy to electricity”) from the heat generating electronic component (110) wherein the Peltier cooler (740) is disposed between the thermosyphon (750) and the heat generating electronic component (730).
With respect to Claim 11, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 1 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the electrowetting thermosyphon assembly further comprises a wick structure (local wick structure, in column 5, lines 15-18, “The liquid then collects at the bottom of the condenser region by gravity or a local wick structure and is transported back to the evaporator region 210 via the capillaries in the capillary structure 245.”), wherein the wick structure (local wick structure) serves to transport the liquid to an evaporator surface (a surface within the evaporation area (210)).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal in view of Bahadur in view of Ludwig in view of Tomioka (US 7,652,885 - hereinafter, "Tomioka").
With respect to Claim 4, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 1 as per above, but fails to specifically teach or suggest the limitation of Claim 4.
Tomioka, however, teaches (in Figure 3) wherein forced air (air generated by fan unit (34)) flows over a condenser (42) as part of a cooling process (in column 2, lines 58-62, “The cooling device 26 includes a loop heat pipe 32 which cools down the heat generating parts 25, a heat sink 33 connected to a heat radiating portion of the loop heat pipe 32, and a fan unit 34 which supplies air to the heat sink 33 in order to promote the cooling down of the heat sink 33.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Tomioka with Ghoshal, such that forced air flows over a condenser as part of a cooling process as taught by Tomioka since doing so would improve the heat dissipation of the heat pipe of Ghoshal by promoting the cool down of the condenser region of Ghoshal. (in column 2, lines 58-62)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal in view of Bahadur in view of Ludwig in view of Prasher et al. (US 6,381,135 - hereinafter, " Prasher ").
With respect to Claim 8, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Ludwig teaches the limitations of Claim 6 as per above, but fails to specifically teach or suggest the limitations of Claim 8.
Prasher, however, teaches (in Figure 2 and in column 3, lines 2-5) wherein the heat generating electronic component (204) is disposed on a thermally conductive gap filler pad (206, in column 3, lines 2-5, “The loop heat pipe 200 shown in FIG. 2 has a substrate 202 with a die 204 on top of the substrate 202. TIM layer 206 is between the die and the evaporator 212.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Prasher with Ghoshal, such that a heat generating electronic component is disposed on a thermally conductive gap filler pad as taught by Prasher since doing so would improve heat transfer by reducing the contact resistance the heat generating electronic component and the thermosyphon of Ghoshal.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal in view of Bahadur
With respect to Claim 12, Ghoshal teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
A method of cooling an electronic components using an thermosyphon assembly comprising:
introducing heat into the thermosyphon assembly (see Figure 3 and 5) from a heat generating electronic component (110) disposed on a surface (see Figure 3) of a thermosyphon (140), wherein an area (an area of the thermosyphon (140), see Figure 3 and 5) of the thermosyphon (140) heated by the heat generating electronic component (110) is an evaporator area (210);
passing a two phase coolant (130) contained within the thermosyphon (140) over the evaporator area (210) and evaporating at least a portion of the two phase coolant (130) into a vapor (vapor state of (130)), wherein the two phase coolant (130) comprises a liquid (liquid state of (130)) and the vapor (vapor state of (130));
discharging the vapor (vapor state of (130), see Figure 3) from the evaporator area (210) into a condenser (225);
condensing the vapor (vapor state of (130) , see Figure 3) within the condenser (225) into a liquid (liquid state of (130));
discharging the liquid (liquid state of (130) , see Figure 3) downstream of the condenser (225).
Ghoshal fails to specifically teach or suggest an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser via an electrowetting electrode.
Bahadur, however, teaches (in Figure 3A-3B) an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly (see Figure 3A-3B) and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser (302) via an electrowetting electrode (203, pumping electrode, see Figure 3A-3B, in paragraph [0022], “At condenser 302, discrete liquid droplets are “electrically” pinched from the condensed pool (see sections 305A-305B) and pumped towards evaporator 301 in liquid conduits 303 by sequentially actuating a series of underlying electrodes, such as electrodes 203 shown in device 200 of FIG. 2”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Bahadur with Ghoshal, such that an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser via an electrowetting electrode as taught by Bahadur since doing so would improve heat dissipation through propelling the droplet motion through electrowetting and allows transportation of fluid against gravity over long distances. (in paragraph [0023])
With respect to Claim 13, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur teaches the limitations of Claim 12 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
wherein the liquid (liquid state of (130)) discharged from the electrowetting electrode (203, pumping electrode, as taught by Bahadur in Claim 12 as per above) is discharged to the evaporator area (210) of the thermosyphon (140).
With respect to Claim 14, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur teaches the limitations of Claim 12 as per above, Ghoshal further teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
further comprising cooling of the evaporator area (210) with a Peltier cooler (740) disposed between the heat generating electronic component (110) and the thermosyphon (140, see Figure 7A-7B).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal in view of Bahadur in view of Failing (US 2011/0302078 – hereinafter, “Failing”)
With respect to Claim 15, Ghoshal teaches (in Figure 7A-7B)
A method of generating power from a heat generating electronic component using an thermosyphon assembly comprising:
introducing a heat (a heat from (110 or 730)) into the thermosyphon assembly (see Figure 3 and 5 and 7A-7B) from a heat generating electronic component (730) disposed on a surface (see Figure 7A) of a Peltier cooler (740), wherein the Peltier cooler (740) is disposed on a thermosyphon (750); and
an area (an area of the thermosyphon (140), see Figure 3 and 5) of the thermosyphon (750) heated by the heat generating electronic component (110) disposed on the Peltier cooler (740) disposed on a surface (see Figure 7A) of the thermosyphon (750) comprises an evaporator area (210, see Figure 5);
passing a two phase coolant (130) contained within the thermosyphon (750) over the evaporator area (210) and evaporating at least a portion of the two phase coolant (130) into a vapor (vapor state of (130)), wherein the two phase coolant (130) comprises a liquid (liquid state of (130)) and the vapor (vapor state of (130));
discharging the vapor (vapor state of (130)) from the evaporator area (210) into a condenser (225);
condensing the vapor (vapor state of (130)) within the condenser (225) into the liquid (liquid state of (130));
discharging the liquid (liquid state of (130)) downstream of the condenser (225).
Ghoshal fails to specifically teach or suggest an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser via an electrowetting electrode; wherein the heat from the heat generating electronic components is used to generate electricity from the Peltier cooler.
Bahadur, however, teaches (in Figure 3A-3B) an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly (see Figure 3A-3B) and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser (302) via an electrowetting electrode (203, pumping electrode, see Figure 3A-3B, in paragraph [0022], “At condenser 302, discrete liquid droplets are “electrically” pinched from the condensed pool (see sections 305A-305B) and pumped towards evaporator 301 in liquid conduits 303 by sequentially actuating a series of underlying electrodes, such as electrodes 203 shown in device 200 of FIG. 2”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Bahadur with Ghoshal, such that an electrowetting thermosyphon assembly and discharging the liquid downstream of the condenser via an electrowetting electrode as taught by Bahadur since doing so would improve heat dissipation through propelling the droplet motion through electrowetting and allows transportation of fluid against gravity over long distances. (in paragraph [0023])
With respect to the limitation requiring wherein the heat from the heat generating electronic components is used to generate electricity from the Peltier cooler.
Failing teaches (in paragraph [0461] to [0462]) wherein a heat (heat generated by (2460)) from a components (2460) is used to generate electricity (electrical energy) from a Peltier cooler (2464, in paragraph [0462], “In one embodiment, component 2464 may be configured to convert heat generated by an energy transfer component (e.g., 2460) into electrical energy. For example, component 2464 may be a thermoelectric cooler or other component capable of generating electricity responsive to a temperature differential being applied across a first side and a second side of component 2464.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Failing with Ghoshal, such that a heat from a components is used to generate electricity from a Peltier cooler as taught by Failing since doing so would advantageous to recover energy that would otherwise be lost. (in paragraph [0462])
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghoshal in view of Bahadur in view of Failing in view of Ludwig
With respect to Claim 16, Ghoshal as modified by Bahadur as modified by Failing teaches the limitations of Claim 15 as per above, but fails to specifically teach or suggest the limitations of Claim 16.
Ludwig, however, teaches (in paragraph [0308] to paragraph [0310])
wherein an electricity (electricity, in paragraph [0310], “In Seebeck mode, traditional thermoelectric devices made with traditional thermoelectric materials convert approximately 10 percent of thermal energy to electricity”) generated from a peltier cooler (thermoelectric device) is used to maintain a temperature (in paragraph [0316], “In general, thermoelectric devices are reciprocal in that they can operate in either a thermoelectric cooler or a thermoelectric electric current generator as determined by imposed thermal conditions and electrical connections to the reciprocal thermoelectric device. Further, it is noted that when acting as a thermoelectric electric current generator, a voltage is produced, the same voltage that is used in thermocouples (a specialized thermoelectric device) for the measurement of temperature. Thus, thermoelectric devices can additionally serve as a temperature sensor”, a specialized thermoelectric device can be used to serve as a temperature sensor, thus able to maintain a temperature of the heat generating electronic component, wherein the thermoelectric device can operate in either a thermoelectric cooler or a thermoelectric electric current generator additionally serve as a temperature sensor) at a base of a heat generating electronic component (electronic Integrated Circuit ("IC") chips, in paragraph [0003], “In the normal course of operation, the electronic Integrated Circuit ("IC") chips that are comprised by computer hardware generate heat”); where the Peltier cooler (thermoelectric device) is operated in the power generation mode (Seebeck (heat-to-power conversion) mode, in paragraph [0308]) using the Seebeck effect (in paragraph [0168], “the phenomenon in traditional Seebeck effect thermoelectric devices wherein simple heat conduction heat flow (thicker vertical arrows) provides a dominant path for heat flow, leaving far less heat to actually drive the electron flow (thinner vertical arrows) that creates a Seebeck effect electric current”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ludwig with Ghoshal in view of Failing, such that an electricity generated from a Peltier cooler is used to maintain a temperature at a base of a heat generating electronic component; where the Peltier cooler is operated in the power generation mode using the Seebeck effect as taught by Ludwig since doing so would create a system for Ghosal’s peltier cooler to provides heat transfer, heat-to-electricity conversion, temperature flux measurements for use in interfacing integrated circuit packages. (in paragraph [0055] to paragraph [0056] and in paragraph [0314])
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to Applicant’s remark to Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bahadur (Present remarks page 7) The Examiner respectfully agrees and rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bahadur has been withdrawn.
With respect to Applicant’s remark to Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable (Present remarks page 8-10) The Examiner notes that Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are directed to the claims as amended, the rejection has been modified to meet the limitations of the amended claims (See rejection above).
Conclusion
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 Steven Ngo whose telephone number is (571)272-4295. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 4:00PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at (571) 272-3740. 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.
/S.N./Examiner , Art Unit 2835
/Jayprakash N Gandhi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2835
Prosecution Insights