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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 07/23/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 10, and 11 are amended; support for amendment can be found in paragraphs [0010-0011, 0017, 0023, 0029, 0033, 0053-0055] of the specification, and original claim 3. Thus, Claims 1-19 are pending and are rejected under prior art on their merits below. Of these, claim 1 is independent, and the remainder are dependent.
The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 5-9, 14, and 16-19 of the previous Office action, are overcome by the amendment and are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks at page 9, filed 07/23/2026, with respect to original claim 1, particularly the limitation of “a cell cooling unit for multi-sided cooling of a prismatic battery cell”, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited portions of Milde do not appear to expressly describe a single cell level cooling unit assigned to a particular energy storage element 17. Rather, elements 6 and 7 are described as structural components that collectively form the battery box, and the cited disclosure does not appear to establish that the selected wall portions collectively form one cell cooling unit assigned to one energy storage element and configured to contact three sides of that element.
In response to the Applicant’s argument, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3, Mide discloses interconnected L-shaped elements 6 and 7 having bottom portions 10 and wall sections 12 that include cooling channels 11 and 13. The relevant portions surrounding an individual energy storage element collectively provide cooling along three sides and form a U-shaped arrangement.
Applicant’s argument appears to require that the claimed “cell cooling unit” be a physically separate component distinct from the battery housing. Claim 1, however, does not require the cell cooling unit to be separate from, or incapable of forming part of, the battery housing. Rather, the claim defines the cell cooling unit by the recited structural and functional relationships of its cooling walls at right angles. Accordingly, the fact that Mide describes elements 6 and 7 as components of battery box 5 does not preclude the relevant portions of those elements from satisfying the claimed cooling-wall limitations. Thus, Mide discloses structure satisfying the limitations recited in the original claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is not commensurate with the scope of original and amended claim 1 and is not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks pages 9-11, filed 07/23/2026, with respect to amended claim 1, specifically the limitation of “the first cooling wall is located between the prismatic battery cell and the adjacent prismatic battery cell”, have been fully considered and are persuasive in overcoming the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of the prior Office Action relying on Milde. However, the arguments are directed to limitations introduced by the amended claims that were not present in the claims at the time of the prior Office Action. Accordingly, a new ground of rejection relying on Milde in view of Ke (see citations below) is made in light of the claim amendments filed on 07/23/2026.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (DE 102017005315 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation, cited in IDS filed 12/22/2023), and further in view of Ke et al. (US 20240266634 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Milde teaches a cell cooling unit for multi-sided cooling of a prismatic battery cell of a battery module (Fig. 4, [0024, 0025], L-shaped elements 6, 7 each having cooling channels 11, 13 and defining a cooling structure around energy storage elements 17; the energy storage elements 17 correspond to prismatic battery cells and a plurality thereof forms a battery module), comprising:
a first cooling wall for arrangement on a first side of the prismatic battery cell (Fig. 3, [0024], wall section 12 of L-shaped element 6 arranged along a side of energy storage element 17, see annotated Figure below),
and a second cooling wall for arrangement on a second side of the prismatic battery cell (Fig. 3, [0024], bottom portion 10 of L-shaped element 6 arranged along another side of energy storage element 17, see annotated Figure below),
wherein the second cooling wall connects to the first cooling wall at a right angle (Fig. 3, L-shaped element 6 comprises bottom portion 10 connected to wall section 12 forming an L-shaped cross-section),
wherein the first cooling wall has at least one first cooling channel portion through which a liquid coolant can flow (Fig. 3, [0024], cooling channel 13 within wall section 12),
and the second cooling wall has at least one second cooling channel portion through which a-the liquid coolant can flow (Fig. 3, [0024], cooling channel 11 within bottom portion 10)
Milde further teaches wall section 12 of L-shaped element 7 lies opposite the first cooling wall of the energy storage element. Milde, however does not teach limitations wherein the cell cooling unit further comprises a third cooling wall that connects to the first cooling wall at a right angle and lies opposite the second cooling wall, wherein the first cooling wall, the second cooling wall, and the third cooling wall collectively form a U-shaped cell cooling unit assigned to the prismatic battery cell and configured to contact three sides of the prismatic battery cell, and wherein, in a cell stack comprising the prismatic battery cell and an adjacent prismatic battery cell, the first cooling wall is located between the prismatic battery cell and the adjacent prismatic battery cell and contacts both the first side of the prismatic battery cell and a side of the adjacent prismatic battery cell.
However, Ke teaches that cooling component 200 includes a cooling unit 201 and an integrated unit 202 for cooling prismatic battery cells ([0100]). Ke further teaches that an integrated unit 202 may be further disposed on the top of the battery 10 (the top face 103 of the battery cell 100) in addition to integrated unit 202 disposed at the bottom (the bottom face 104 of the battery cell 100) of the battery 10 and the cooling unit 201 disposed between the battery cells 100, thereby implementing more efficient cooling for the battery 10 from both the top and the bottom through the two integrated units 202 (Figs. 2, 47; [0087, 0100, 0150]). Ke further teaches that the cooling component 200 serves as a cooling system connected to an external water-cooled chiller. The cooling component 200 is pressurized by the water-cooled chiller. In this way, the cooling medium can flow into the cooling unit 201 and the integrated unit 202 from one end of the cooling component 200, pass through the clearance between the battery cells 100, and flow out from the other end of the cooling component 200, so as to circulate the cooling medium ([0105]) to balance the temperature of battery cells.
Accordingly, Milde as modified by Ke would include a third cooling wall (integrated unit 202 of Ke on top of battery cell, see annotated Figure below) arranged to connect to the first cooling wall at a right angle and lies opposite the second cooling wall,
wherein the first cooling wall, the second cooling wall, and the third cooling wall collectively form a U-shaped cell cooling unit assigned to the prismatic battery cell and configured to contact three sides of the prismatic battery cell (see annotated Figure below),
and wherein, in a cell stack comprising the prismatic battery cell and an adjacent prismatic battery cell, the first cooling wall is located between the prismatic battery cell and the adjacent prismatic battery cell and contacts both the first side of the prismatic battery cell and a side of the adjacent prismatic battery cell (wall section 12 of L-shaped element 6 of Milde, see annotated Figure below).
Further, Milde, and Ke are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery cell cooling arrangements.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify cooling unit of Milde to include a third cooling wall as taught by Ke, disposed opposite Mide’s bottom cooling wall, in order to provide more efficient cooling for the battery from multiple sides ([0150]).
PNG
media_image1.png
631
1431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Milde further teaches a limitation wherein the at least one first cooling channel portion and the at least one second cooling channel portion are fluidly connected to one another (Fig. 4, [0025], connection of the cooling channels 11, 13 through openings 20).
Specifically, Milde teaches that cooling channels 11 and 13 communicate with connection openings 20 and are interconnected within the cooling circuit. Accordingly, the cooling channel 11 of bottom portion 10 (claimed second cooling channel) is fluidly connected to the cooling channel 13 of wall section 12 (claimed first cooling channel), as claimed.
Regarding claim 3, and claim 11, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claims 1 and 2 as stated above. Modified Milde further teaches a limitation wherein the third cooling wall has at least a third cooling channel portion which is fluidly connected to the first cooling channel portion.
Specifically, Ke teaches that cooling medium can flow into the cooling unit 201 and the integrated units 202 from one end of the cooling component 200, pass through the clearance between the battery cells 100, and flow out from the other end of the cooling component 200, so as to circulate the cooling medium ([0105, 0150]) to balance the temperature of battery cells. Thus, Ke teaches supplying cooling medium to cooling unit 201 and integrated units 202 as portions of cooling component 200.
Therefore, 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 cooling unit of modified Milde such that the third cooling channel is fluidly connected to the first cooling channel as taught by Ke, in order to provide more efficient cooling for the battery from multiple sides and balance the temperature of battery cells ([0105, 0150]).
Regarding claim 5, claim 14, and claim 15, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claims 1, 2, and 3, as stated above. Milde further teaches a limitation wherein the cell cooling unit has a coolant supply connection and a coolant discharge connection, which are arranged on the second and/or third cooling wall ([0015]: connection openings allow the coolant to be supplied to or removed from the cooling channels; [0025]: L-shaped elements 6, 7 and the I-shaped element 8 have corresponding connection openings on their underside).
Specifically, Milde teaches connection openings 20 that communicate with cooling channels 11, and permit coolant to be supplied to and removed from the cooling channels, thereby corresponding to the claimed coolant supply connection and coolant discharge connection ([0015, 0025]). Additionally, Milde teaches connection openings located on the L-shaped elements 6 and 7 themselves, namely on the underside of the L-shaped elements, which communicate with cooling channels 11 disposed within the wall sections 10. Accordingly, Milde teaches coolant supply and discharge connections arranged on the cooling walls corresponding to the claimed second cooling wall (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Milde further teaches a cooling arrangement with a cell cooling unit according to claim 1 (Fig. 4 of Milde), the cooling arrangement comprises the prismatic battery cell, which has a cell width in a first direction, a cell length in a second direction and a cell height in a third direction (Fig. 4, energy storage element 17 having width, length, and height dimensions), which has the first side and an opposite fourth side, which delimit the battery cell in the first direction and which represent the two largest sides of the battery cell in terms of surface area, which has a fifth side and an opposite sixth side which delimit the battery cell with respect to the second direction, and which has the second side and an opposite third side, which delimit the battery cell with respect to the third direction (Fig. 4, energy storage element 17 having opposing sides defining its sides), wherein the maximum wall width of the second cooling wall and/or the third cooling wall corresponds to the cell width or is smaller (Fig. 4, width of wall sections 10 is smaller than the width of energy storage elements 17).
Regarding claim 7, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claim 6 as stated above. Ke further teaches a limitation wherein the battery cell has two cell poles which are arranged on the fifth and/or sixth side of the battery cell, in particular one of which is arranged on the fifth side and one on the sixth side.
Specifically, Ke discloses a battery cell 100 having two first side faces 101, two second side faces 102, a top face 103, a bottom face 104, and two electrode terminals E ([0006, 0025, 0156]; Fig. 5). Ke further teaches that the electrode terminals E may be disposed on the two second side faces 102 of the battery cell, respectively ([0022,0150], Fig. 47). Thus, Ke teaches two cell poles arranged on opposite side faces of the battery cell, corresponding to the claimed fifth side and sixth side.
Additionally, Ke teaches cooling units 202 disposed on the top face 103 and bottom face 104 and a cooling unit 201 disposed on the first side faces 101 of the battery cell (Fig. 47; [0150]), while the electrode terminals E are positioned on the second side faces 102 that are not occupied by the cooling structures. Accordingly, Ke teaches separating the cell poles from the cooled surfaces of the battery cell so that the cooling components may be placed on the remaining battery-cell surfaces to implement more efficient cooling ([0150]).
Therefore, 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 battery cell arrangement of Milde to position the cell poles on opposite side faces as taught by Ke because Ke teaches that locating the terminals on side faces separate from the cooled surfaces allows cooling components to implement more efficient cooling of the battery cell ([0150]).
Regarding claim 10, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Milde further teaches a battery module for a motor vehicle (Fig. 1, [0019]), with multiple prismatic battery cells (energy storage elements 17, Fig. 4) which are arranged next to one another in a first direction (Fig. 4, energy storage elements 17 arranged adjacent one another within compartments formed by wall sections 12), wherein each of the battery cells is assigned a cell cooling unit according to claim 1 (as discussed above with respect to claim 1), which is arranged on the associated battery cell, so that the first cooling wall of at least one of the cell cooling units is located between two battery cells arranged adjacent to one another and rests in particular on both of these battery cells (wall sections 12 disposed between adjacent energy storage elements 17, Fig. 4).
Specifically, Milde teaches that the energy storage elements 17 are arranged in compartment structures formed by wall sections 12, wherein the wall sections 12 contain cooling channels 13, and 14 and are positioned between adjacent energy storage elements 17 (Fig. 4). Accordingly, the wall sections 12 correspond to the claimed first cooling wall located between adjacent battery cells and contacting opposing sides of the adjacent battery cells.
Claims 4, 12-13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Milde, as modified by Ke, as applied to claims 1, 2, and 3 above, and further in view of Schuler et al. (EP 3944401 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation) and Puglia et al. (US 20230369686 A1).
Regarding claim 4, claim 12, and claim 13, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claims 1, 2, and 3, as stated above. Modified Milde does not teach a limitation wherein the second cooling wall has a recess for a cell degassing opening of the battery cell, wherein the second cooling wall has a wall width in a first direction and a wall length in a second direction, wherein the wall width varies along the second direction and is smaller in the region of the recess for the cell degassing opening compared to a maximum wall width of the second cooling wall in the first direction.
However, Schuler teaches a battery module including a U-shaped body 104 having a central portion 110 and side portions 108 formed from a cooling plate 114 containing an integrated cooling channel 116 (Fig. 1, [0036, 0038]). Schuler further teaches a vent channel 700 for removing gases leaking from battery cells ([0054]). The vent channel 700 may be part of cover 400 (Fig. 4, [0056]). Accordingly, Schuler teaches a cooling structure integrated with a venting structure for directing gases released from battery cells.
Further, modified Milde, and Schuler are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery cell cooling arrangements.
Schuler does not teach a recess for a cell degassing opening of the battery cell, wherein the wall has a wall width in a first direction and a wall length in a second direction, wherein the wall width varies along the second direction and is smaller in the region of the recess for the cell degassing opening compared to a maximum wall width of the second cooling wall in the first direction.
However, Puglia teaches a cell unit including a unit frame 1110 having a recess 1116 configured to accommodate and align with a vent of the cell (Fig. 11A; [0178]). Puglia further teaches that recess 1116 may be aligned with the vent of the cell to aid in directing and funneling vent gases ([0183]). As illustrated in Fig. 11A, recess 1116 removes material from a localized portion of the frame, thereby reducing the width of the frame in the recess region relative to adjacent portions of the frame. Thus, Puglia teaches a wall structure having a width that varies along its length and is smaller in the region of the recess than a maximum wall width elsewhere along the structure.
Further, modified Milde, and Puglia are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of thermal management of battery cells.
Therefore, 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 cooling-wall arrangement of modified Milde to incorporate the vent-channel arrangement of Schuler for removing gases leaking from the battery cells ([0054] of Schuler) and the recess structure of Puglia to aid in directing and funneling vent gases ([0183] of Puglia).
Regarding claim 16, Milde, as modified by Ke, Schuler and Puglia, teaches all limitations of claim 4, as stated above. Milde further teaches a limitation wherein the cell cooling unit has a coolant supply connection and a coolant discharge connection, which are arranged on the second and/or third cooling wall ([0015]: connection openings allow the coolant to be supplied to or removed from the cooling channels; [0025]: L-shaped elements 6, 7 and the I-shaped element 8 have corresponding connection openings on their underside).
Specifically, Milde teaches connection openings 20 that communicate with cooling channels 11, and permit coolant to be supplied to and removed from the cooling channels, thereby corresponding to the claimed coolant supply connection and coolant discharge connection ([0015, 0025]). Additionally, Milde teaches connection openings located on the L-shaped elements 6 and 7 themselves, namely on the underside of the L-shaped elements, which communicate with cooling channels 11 disposed within the wall section 10. Accordingly, Milde teaches coolant supply and discharge connections arranged on the cooling walls corresponding to the claimed second cooling wall (Fig. 4).
Claims 8, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Milde, as modified by Ke, as applied to claims 6, and 7 above, and further in view of Schuler et al. (EP 3944401 A1, citations from enclosed machine translation).
Regarding claim 8, and claim 17, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claims 6, and 7 as stated above. Modified Milde does not teach a limitation wherein the first cooling wall protrudes in the second direction at least beyond one of the fifth and sixth sides of the battery cell.
However, Schuler teaches a battery module including a U-shaped body 104 having a central portion 110 and side portions 108 formed from a cooling plate 114 containing an integrated cooling channel 116 ([0036, 0038]). Schuler further teaches that the cooling plate 114 is bent at bent portions 118 such that at least one rib 120 protrudes from the U-shaped body 104 ([0014, 0032, 0039]). As shown in Figs. 5 and 6, ribs 120, 120' extend outward beyond the side boundaries of battery cell 102. Schuler further teaches that the ribs may protrude in the same direction or in opposite directions and may extend longitudinally along the frame element ([0039, 0053], Figs. 5-6). Because ribs 120, 120' are formed integrally from cooling plate 114 by bending operations, Schuler teaches a protruding portion of the cooling-wall structure extending beyond a side of the battery cell. Further, Schuler teaches the ribs 120 is designed to increase the rigidity of the frame element 106 and supports for positioning the battery cells 102 ([0014, 0039, 0040]). Thus, Schuler teaches the claimed protrusion of the cooling wall beyond one of the fifth and sixth sides of the battery cell.
Further, modified Milde, and Schuler are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery cell cooling arrangements.
Therefore, 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 cooling-wall arrangement of modified Milde to include a protruding cooling-wall portion as taught by Schuler in order to increase the rigidity of the cooling structure and to facilitate support and positioning of the battery cells, as taught by Schuler ([0014, 0039, 0040]).
Claims 9, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Milde, as modified by Ke, as applied to claims 6, and 7 above, and further in view of Kruse et al. (US 20220185124 A1).
Regarding claim 9 and claim 18, Milde, as modified by Ke, teaches all limitations of claims 6, and 7 as stated above. Modified Milde does not teach a limitation wherein the battery cell has a releasable cell degassing opening, in particular in the form of a predetermined breaking point, on the second side or on the third side.
However, Kruse teaches battery cells 14 having a cooling arrangement including a housing cover 26 configured as a cooling cover and provided with cooling channels through which a cooling medium flows to cool the battery cells ([0042, 0044, 0045], Fig. 1). Kruse further teaches degassing devices 24 arranged on the upper side 18, which may be configured as bursting membranes, valves, or the like that permit gases to escape from the battery cells in order to prevent overpressure and explosion of the battery cells ([0043]). Kruse additionally teaches a degassing region adjacent the battery cells through which gases escaping from the degassing devices are guided and further teaches that the degassing region may extend directly to and through an opening formed in the housing cover itself ([0016]). Accordingly, Kruse teaches a releasable cell degassing opening in the form of a predetermined breaking point within a battery-cell cooling arrangement.
Further, modified Milde, and Kruse are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery cell cooling arrangements.
Therefore, 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 cooled battery-cell arrangement of modified Milde to incorporate the releasable degassing opening taught by Kruse in order to reduce battery-cell overpressure and prevent explosion ([0016,0044-0046]). In addition, placement of the releasable degassing opening on the second side or the third side of the battery cell would have been an obvious matter of design choice depending on the particular cooling-wall configuration. See also MPEP 2144.04 VI C.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Milde, as modified by Ke, and Schuler, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Kruse et al. (US 20220185124 A1)
Regarding claim 19, Milde, as modified by Ke, and Schuler, teaches all limitations of claim 8 as stated above. Modified Milde does not teach a limitation wherein the battery cell has a releasable cell degassing opening, in particular in the form of a predetermined breaking point, on the second side or on the third side.
However, Kruse teaches battery cells 14 having a cooling arrangement including a housing cover 26 configured as a cooling cover and provided with cooling channels through which a cooling medium flows to cool the battery cells ([0042, 0044, 0045], Fig. 1). Kruse further teaches degassing devices 24 arranged on the upper side 18, which may be configured as bursting membranes, valves, or the like that permit gases to escape from the battery cells in order to prevent overpressure and explosion of the battery cells ([0043]). Kruse additionally teaches a degassing region adjacent the battery cells through which gases escaping from the degassing devices are guided and further teaches that the degassing region may extend directly to and through an opening formed in the housing cover itself ([0016]). Accordingly, Kruse teaches a releasable cell degassing opening in the form of a predetermined breaking point within a battery-cell cooling arrangement.
Further, modified Milde, and Kruse are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of battery cell cooling arrangements.
Therefore, 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 cooled battery-cell arrangement of modified Milde to incorporate the releasable degassing opening and venting arrangement taught by Kruse in order to reduce battery-cell overpressure and prevent explosion ([0016,0044-0046]). In addition, placement of the releasable degassing opening on the second side or the third side of the battery cell would have been an obvious matter of design choice depending on the particular cooling-wall configuration. See also MPEP 2144.04 VI C.
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 Lili Rassouli whose telephone number is (571)272-9760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM-4:00 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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/LILI RASSOULI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
