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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This is a non-final Office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 05/15/2026. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 2 – 3, 5, 10, 12 – 13, and 15 are canceled. Claim 22 is new. Claims 1, 4, 6 – 9, 11, 14, and 16 – 22 are pending in the current Office action.
In light of applicant’s amendments to claim 1 and the cancellation claims 3 and 13, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 112(d) rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn. In light of the cancellation of claim 12, the objection set forth in the previous Office action is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are maintained with the rejection of claim 1 rewritten to address the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that that none of the cited prior art explicitly teach/render obvious the claimed limitation “wherein the functional layer consists essentially of a nanometal, a nano carbon, and a binder” in light of the following:
1) Zhao (primary reference in previous Office action) does not explicitly teach/disclose a preference from the inclusion of both metal material and carbon material and further appears to teach away from using both based on working examples {i.e. Zhao’s working examples only include one or the other of a carbon material or metal material}.
While the examiner acknowledges that Zhao does not explicitly disclose an embodiments/or a preference where the conductive material of the porous composite layer includes a metal material and a carbon material; however, the examiner respectfully reminds applicant that, per MPEP 2123(II), disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute as a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments [Also See MPEP 2123(I)]. As such, applicant’s arguments regarding Zhao teaching away from including both a metal material and carbon material is unpersuasive, and the examiner maintains that by teaching that the inorganic conductive material is one or a mixture of inorganic materials and that the inorganic conductive material may be one or more selected from a metal material and a carbon material (Zhao: [0016];[0019]), Zhao appears to at least suggest having a porous composite layer {i.e. corresponds to claimed functional layer} that includes both a conductive metal material and a carbon material.
2) Comparative example 2 vs. working examples in Table 1 of the instant specification shows superior results/criticality of when the functional layer includes only one of a nanometal or nanocarbon vs. both {high capacity and a CFC sharp drop point at a higher cycle number is achieved when both are used}.
The examiner acknowledges that comparative example 2, when compared to working examples 1 – 3, shows a relatively lower capacity and a CFC sharp drop point after less cycles; however, the examiner notes that the presence of both a nanometal and nanocarbon only shown to appear critical when: 1) the coating is included between the active material layer and current collector {i.e. Examples 1 – 3 vs. 4}; 2) the nanometal is Ag; and 3) the nanocarbon is Denka black with a D50 of 50 nm ([0097];[00105];[00108];[00119]), and as claim 1 allows for a broader selection of nanometal and nanocarbon {i.e. any nanometal and nanocarbon} than what is shown to provide applicant alleged unexpected/superior results , it is unclear if the presence of both the nanometal and nanocarbon would be critical across the broader selection of nanometals and nanocarbons {i.e. the claimed invention appears incommensurate in scope with the claimed invention argued to provide unexpected results} and applicant’s argument regarding the unexpected/superior effect of the inclusion of both the nanometal and nanocarbon is unpersuasive.
The examiner further notes that, as shown by Examples 1 – 3, applicant alleged superior/unexpected results also appear to be affected by the amount of nanometal and nanocarbon {i.e. Examples 1 – 2 vs. Example 3} as well as the D50 of the nanometal {i.e. Example 1 vs. 2}. That is Examples 1 – 2, which have 30 wt% Ag and 55 wt% Denka black, are shown to exhibit a higher specific capacity than Example 3 which uses 15 wt% Ag and 70 wt% Denka black (See Table 1 and [0097];[00105];[00108]); and Example 1, which uses Ag with a D50 of 100 nm, is shown to have a CFC sharp drop point at a lower cycle number than Example 2, which uses Ag having a D50 of 50 nm (See Table 1; [0097];[00105]). As such, the data of the instant specification appears to suggest that there are additional factors responsible for the unexpected/superior results; however, there is no limitation in independent claim 1 addressing the D50 of the metal nanoparticle and the wt% range of claim 1 is significantly broader than the range shown to provide the alleged unexpected/superior results. Therefore, applicant’s results further appear to be incommensurate in scope with the claimed invention.
Assuming arguendo that the results were persuasive, examiner further respectfully submits that the data is further incommensurate with claim 1’s scope because, claim 1 is directed to a negative electrode whereas, as acknowledged in [00125 – 00137] the results {i.e. specific capacity/CFC sharp drop point} are obtained from incorporating the electrode in a battery using a Li-Ni-Co-Al-O positive electrode and electrolyte comprising LiPF6, fluoroethylene carbonate, and a mixed solvent of EC/EMC/DC ([001002 – 00103]). Absent additional evidence or a declaration explaining that for example, the particular components of the battery {i.e. the cathode material/electrolyte composition/etc.} are not necessary for achieving applicant’s unexpected results, applicant arguments regarding unexpected results are further rendered unpersuasive per MPEP 716.02(d) and the rejection made in view of Zhao (CN111710832A), Wu (US PG Pub. 2022/0209218 A) and Choi (US PG Pub. 2021/0249648 A1) is maintained and included below.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually (See argument presented against Cho) , one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Further, the examiner notes that in the previous Office action, no prior art referred to as “Cho” was relied upon. As such, applicant’s arguments regarding Cho are moot.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references {i.e. see arguments regarding combination of Zhao and Choi on pg. , the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Zhao, the primary reference, is directed to a negative electrode for a battery and already suggests using Si-C composite anode materials with additional carbon active material (See Zhao: [0010];[0028];[0030]) and Choi teaches a negative electrode active material for a lithium ion battery that includes a silicon-carbon composite material and crystalline carbon (Choi: [0025]), and thus within the scope of material taught by Zhao. Choi further teaches obtaining benefits from using the material relevant/applicable to Zhao {i.e. suppressing expansion of the Si-containing active material (See Zhao: [0026] and Choi: [0033];[0038]). As such, the rejection made in view of Zhao and Choi appears to support prima facie obviousness and applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive [MPEP 2123(I)].
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: The subject matter of claim 20 is redundant. Specifically claim 1 already establishes that the functional layer includes a binder and claim 20 is dependent on claim 11 which is dependent on claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 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.
Specifically, Claim 1 recites the limitation " the nanometal " in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the nanometal” in the claim, and it is unclear if the nanometal is the same or different as the nanometal introduced in line 9 of claim 1. As the limitation in line 5 refers to an amount of nanometal included in the functional layer and the limitation in line 9 establishes that the functionally layer consists essentially of a nanometal, a nanocarbon, and a binder, the examiner is interpreting claim 1 to recite --A negative electrode, comprising: a current collector; a negative active material layer; and a functional layer between the current collector and the negative active material, wherein the functional laver consists essentially of a nanometal, a nano carbon, and a binder, wherein an amount of the nanometal is about 1 wt% to about 50 wt% based on 100 wt% of the functional layer, and wherein the negative active material layer comprises a negative active material and the negative active material is a Si-C composite and crystalline carbon—for clarity. This interpretation is support by [0028 – 0029];[0039]).
Claims 4, 6 – 9, 11, 14, and 16 – 22 are similarly rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6 – 9, 11, 14, and 16 – 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (CN111710832A) in view of Wu (US PG Pub. 2022/0209218 A1) and Choi (US PG Pub. 2021/0249648 A1) {Examiner Note: All prior art was cited in previous the Office action mailed 03/16/2026}.
Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Zhao discloses a negative electrode ([0010]), comprising a current collector (Fig. 2, 1; [0011];[0156]); a negative active material layer (Refer to layer including active material 2 and active material layer binder 3 in Fig. 2; [0013];[0156]); and a functional layer between the current collector and the negative active material layer (porous composite layer; Refer to layer including inorganic conductive material 4 and adhesive polymer 5 in Fig. 2; [0012];[0014];[0156]).
The porous composite layer taught by Zhao reads on being a functional layer because the porous composite layer has a function when included in the negative electrode, specifically the porous composite layer increases adhesion between the silicon-containing negative electrode active material layer and the current collector; suppresses expansion of the silicon-negative electrode active material, and assists in transmitting electrons ([0021];[0023];[0026]).
Zhao teaches the porous composite layer consisting of a polymer material having adhesiveness {i.e. a binder} and inorganic conductive material ([0016]). Zhao further teaches that the inorganic conductive material of the porous composite layer can be one or more from a metal material and a carbon material having electronic conductivity and further suggests using nanosized particles by teaching having the average particle size of the conductive material be 0.01µm {i.e. 10 nm} – 10 µm ([0016];[0019]), as such in light of [0033 – 0034] and [0037 – 0038] of the instant specification, Zhao at least suggests having a porous composite layer {i.e. corresponds to claimed functional layer} consisting essentially of a nanometal, a nanocarbon, and a binder but does not explicitly disclose an embodiment where the inorganic conductive material includes both a nanometal and nanocarbon.
However, selection of both a carbon and metal conductive material for the porous composite layer of Zhao would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, because such a selection would be from a finite list of conductive materials taught by Zhao and further would be a combination of conductive material suggested by Zhao to be suitable for achieving the desired effects of improved bonding effect and conductivity ([0019];[0021]) [See MPEP 2143(I)].
To further render obvious the claimed limitation of “the functional layer consisting essentially of a nanometal and nanocarbon” the following teachings from Wu are relied upon.
Wu teaches a negative electrode including a composite layer 14 that also acts as a functional layer for the negative electrode, that is the composite layer in Wu has a function of effectively making the concentration of lithium ion flow at the surface of the negative electrode uniform, inhibiting dendrite grown, and mitigating volume swelling of the electrode during battery charging/discharging (Fig. 2; [0019][0024];[0042]). The composite layer in Wu includes a binder material, lithophilic conductive carbon nanoparticles, and metal nanoparticles ([0027];[0030];[0035 – 0036];[0039]). Lithophilic conductive carbon nanomaterials taught by Wu include graphite, fluorocarbon, nitrogen-doped graphite, nitrogen-doped graphene, or a combination thereof and metal nanoparticles taught by Wu include silver, gold, tin, zinc, magnesium, or a combination thereof ([0030];[0036]); thus, Wu appears to teach a functional layer composition that overlaps in scope with porous composite layer composition taught in Zhao. The combination of the lithophilic nanoparticles and metal nanoparticles are taught by Wu to allows for both effective inhibition of lithium dendrite formation/swelling mitigation as well as uniform electronic flow ([0019];[0036 – 0038]). Wu further teaches that nano-sized particles {i.e. less than or equal to 100 nm} allow for more uniform lithium ion flow ([0031];[0037]).
Therefore, it would have been further obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the combination of inorganic conductive materials particularly be a combination of lithophilic conductive carbon nanomaterial and a metal nanoparticle as taught by Wu, because such a selection of conductive materials are within the scope of conductive materials taught by Zhao (Zhao: [0016]; Wu: [0030 – 0031];[0036 – 0037]) and, as taught by Wu, such a combination of conductive material would have a reasonable expectation of success in achieving benefits such as effective inhibition of lithium dendrite formation/swelling mitigation as well as more uniform electronic flow.
As established above, modified Zhao includes both a nanometal and a nanocarbon material. Generally, Zhao teaches having the mass ratio polymeric material/inorganic conductive material be preferably 10:90 to 85:15 ([0021]). Furthermore, the porous composite layer is only taught to include polymer material having adhesiveness and inorganic conductive material ([0016]). As such, Zhao suggests using a total amount of conductive material that, with respect to the conductive material composition of modified Zhao, provides an amount of nanometal based on 100 wt% of the functional layer that would overlap/at least encompass the claimed range {i.e. the amount of nanometal in modified Zhao would be an amount included in the range of 15 – 90 wt% based on 100 wt% of the modified porous composite layer based on the taught mass ratio in Zhao}.
Zhao further teaches that decreasing the amount of polymer material in the porous composite layer composition decreases the bonding performance of the layer ([0021]). Decreases in the amount conductive material is taught by Zhao to result in decreases in electronic conductivity, increases in battery internal resistance, and decreases in battery capacity and cycle performance ([0021]).
Wu additionally teaches controlling the weight ratio of lithophilic nanoparticle to metal nanoparticles for the purpose of balancing the effects of the nanoparticles included in the composite layer ([0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the amount of nanometal in modified Zhao to be within the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success that such an amount would result in a porous composite layer with sufficient conductivity/optimized effects of the nanometal conductive material while preventing decreases in bonding performance of the layer and a loss of the effects of the nanocarbon material, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
The negative electrode active material layer in Zhao is taught to include a silicon-containing negative electrode material, a conductive agent, a thickener, and a binder ([0027]); therefore, Zhao further discloses wherein the negative active material layer comprises a negative active material.
Silicon-containing negative electrode materials explicitly taught by Zhao include silicon-carbon composite materials (including nano-silicon-carbon material) and silicon-oxygen composite material (including silicon oxide composite material) ([0028]). Zhao also teaches mixing the silicon-containing composite material with one or more carbon materials ([0030]).
Zhao does not explicitly disclose an embodiment wherein the negative active material is a Si-C composite and crystalline carbon.
Choi teaches a negative electrode active material for a lithium-ion battery that includes: at least one particle selected from a composite crystalline carbon particle (A) including a crystalline carbon core and an amorphous carbon coating layer surrounding the core; a composite crystalline carbon-silicon particle (B) including a mixed core of a crystalline carbon and silicon and an amorphous carbon coating layer surrounding the core; and a composite silicon particle (C) including a silicon core and an amorphous carbon coating layer surrounding the core ([0025]). Choi further particularly teaches that when the negative active material includes the composite crystalline carbon particle (A) and the composite crystalline carbon-silicon particle (B), cycle-life characteristic may be further improved ([0038]).
Therefore, since Zhao already teaches using Si-C composite anode materials and mixing such active materials with carbon materials, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use as the anode active material of Zhao an anode active material mixture as taught by Choi, and thus obtain an anode active material within the claimed scope, with a reasonable expectation of success in furthering Zhao’s goal of obtaining a negative electrode with suppressed expansion of a Si-containing active material (Zhao: [0026]; Choi: [0033]) and obtaining an active material capable of providing improved cycle-life characteristics.
Zhao further discloses a rechargeable lithium ion battery ([0048 – 0049]), comprising the negative electrode (Refer to rejection of claim 1 and [0048 – 0049]); a positive electrode ([0049 – 0050]); and an electrolyte ([0049];[0051 – 0052]) (Claim 11).
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. The porous composite layer of modified Zhao includes silver, gold, tin, zinc, magnesium, or a combination thereof as the conductive metal material (Wu: Table 2; [0036]), which is within the claimed scope of Ag, Pt, Al, Zn, Au, Mg, Ge, Cu, In, Ni, Bi, or a combination thereof.
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Zhao includes, as the conducive material of the porous composite layer, a combination of a carbon conductive material and a metal conductive material, particularly, as established above, a lithophilic carbon nanoparticle and metal nanoparticle as taught by Wu (Zhao: [0016]; Wu: [0030 – 0031];[0036 – 0037]).
Modified Zhao does not explicitly disclose wherein the mixing ratio of the nanometal and nanocarbon is about 10:90 to about 40:60 by weight.
Wu teaches a using a weight ratio of 1:8 to 1:1 of nanometal to lithophilic particle for the purpose of achieving effectively uniform lithium ion concentration flow and promoting the conversions of lithium ions ([0038]). Wu further teaches that increases or decreases in the weight ratio effects the capability of the functional coating to inhibit dendrite growth and mitigate volume swelling for the electrode ([0038]).
Since modified Zhao’s composite porous layer includes lithophilic carbon nanoparticles and metal nanoparticles as taught by Wu, selection of a mixing ratio of nanometal and nanocarbon within the range taught by Wu, and further within the overlapping portion of the taught range and claimed range, would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the effects of the particles {i.e. inhibit dendrite growth/mitigate volume swelling vs. uniform lithium ion flow/conversion}, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claims 7 – 8 and 17 – 18, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Zhao further teaches wherein the functional layer has a thickness of 0.02 µm {i.e. 200 nm} – 12 µm ([0017]), which is within the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 50 nm (Claims 7 and 17) and further within the claimed range of about 50 nm to 20 µm (Claims 8 and 18).
Regarding Claims 9 and 19, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. The porous composite layer of modified Zhao includes a lithophilic carbon nanoparticle as the carbon conductive material. The lithophilic carbon nanoparticles are graphite, fluorocarbon, nitrogen-doped graphite, nitrogen-doped graphene, or a combination thereof (Wu: [0030]). In example 5, Wu also teaches an embodiment of where the lithophilic nanoparticle is particularly carbon black ([0055]). As such, the selection of nanocarbon in modified Zhao overlaps the scope of the claimed selection: carbon black, acetylene black, Ketjen black, Denka black, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, graphite, or a combination thereof.
Since Wu teaches/exemplifies a finite list of lithophilic carbon nanoparticles, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, when selecting a lithophilic carbon nanoparticle for the composite porous layer of modified Zhao, to select a nanocarbon material within the overlapping portion of Wu’s taught list and claimed list, with a reasonable expectation of success that such a selection would be a suitable carbon conductive material for the porous composite layer and further be a selection that provides the conductivity increase effect desired by Zhao {i.e. Zhao already suggests using materials such as carbon black, graphite, and graphene for conductivity purposes ([0019];[0021]) as well as the effects taught in Wu {i.e. lithium dendrite inhibition/reduced volume swelling (Wu: [0019];[0028];[0030]).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Zhao further discloses wherein the functional layer further includes binder (polymer material having adhesiveness; [0016];[0020]).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Zhao teaches including the porous composite layer {i.e. corresponds to functional layer} in a layer between the current collector and the negative electrode active material (Fig. 2; [0010 – 0014]). Modified Zhao, as established above, includes a combination of a conductive metal nanoparticle and a lithophilic carbon nanoparticle as the conductive material of the porous composite layer (Refer to rejection of claim 1 and Zhao: [0016]; Wu: [0030 – 0031];[0036 – 0037]). As such, modified Zhao, as established above, further includes the claimed structure of wherein the functional layer is a single layer directly between the current collector and the negative active material layer and the functional layer includes a mixture of the nanometal and the nanocarbon.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (CN111710832A) in view of Wu (US PG Pub. 2022/0209218 A1) and Choi (US PG Pub. 2021/0249648 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further as evidenced by Hwang (US PG Pub. US PG Pub. 2022/0077469 A1) and Electronics -Notes (Electronic-Notes, “Electrical Resistivity Table for Common Materials” webpage, pp. 1 – 4).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Zhao discloses all limitations as set forth above. The porous composite layer of modified Zhao include both a nanocarbon and a nanometal particularly, as established above, a lithophilic carbon nanoparticle and metal nanoparticle as taught by Wu (Zhao: [0016]; Wu: [0030 – 0031];[0036 – 0037]). Zhao teaches conductive metal particles selected from gold, silver, copper, nickel, tungsten and other metals ([0019]). Wu teaches metal particles selected from silver, gold, tin, zinc, magnesium, or a combination thereof (0036]).
Generally, Wu teaches selecting a metal nanoparticle having a standard Gibbs free energy of reaction (ΔrG) less than 0 and a resistivity than or equal to about 9.9×10−7 Ω·m
Modified Zhao does not explicitly disclose an embodiment wherein the nanometal is Al, Ge, In, Ni, Bi, or a combination thereof
Hwang teaches a composite modified layer that is attached to a surface of an electrode current collector and the layer includes a lithophilic nanoparticle and a polymer ([0004];[0010]). The lithophilic nanoparticle is taught by Hwang to be selected from one or a combination of a nano-particle of Gold (Au), Platinum (Pt), Palladium (Pd), Silicon (Si), Silver (Ag), Aluminum (Al), Bismuth (Bi), Tin (Sn), Zinc (Zn) or Indium (In) ([0023]). Hwang further teaches that the layer, by including the nanoparticle, functions to suppress lithium dendrite growth and further has high lithium ion conductivity, low electron conductivity, and high stability of electrolyte ([0010]). By also assisting in the inhibition of lithium dendrite, the nanoparticles in Hwang have a function like that of lithophilic and metal nanoparticles in Wu (Wu: [0019]).
Furthermore, aluminum, nickel, and zinc are all metals reported to have resistivities less than 9.9×10−7 Ω·m (Refer to Table from Electronics-notes webpage PDF) .
Therefore, selection of metal nanoparticle within the overlapping portion of the claimed scope and the taught scope of metal particle options taught/suggested by Zhao, Wu, and Hwang, and more particularly selection of Ni, Al, or Zn, as a metal nanoparticle of modified Zhang would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, because such a selection of metal nanoparticle are within Zhao’s taught scope and further, as suggested Hwang and the reported resistivities, such metal nanoparticles would have a reasonable expectation of success in being a suitable, equivalent metal nanoparticle option for providing the desired of effects of increased conductivity as well as the suppression of lithium dendrites [See MPEP 2144.06].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 7/22/2026
Prosecution Insights