DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/11/2026 has been entered.
Inventorship
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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's Amendment filed 06/11/2026 has been fully considered and entered.
The original objections to the claims, which were set forth in the Office Action mailed 3/12/2026, have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s Amendment, however, new objections are placed forth. See section below for details.
The previous U.S.C. 112 rejections to the claims, which were set forth in the Office Action mailed 3/12/2026, have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s Amendment, however, new rejections are placed forth. See section below for details
The examiner notes that the Remarks of 6/11/2026 mention feature (2) involving intervals S1 and S2 and that these are limitations incorporated into the claims. The limitations were not found in the claims as filed and have not been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: Applicant argues on page10 that not all Peltier elements of Tanobe 2 are arranged in a single line.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., all Peltier elements arranged in a single line, or even in multiple lines) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Argument 2: The Applicant argues on page 10 that Konishi does not teach arranging Peltier elements of the thermoelectric cooler near the center.
The examiner disagrees. Konishi teaches elements near the periphery and near the center even if not directly in the center (see Fig. 3A; note Fig. 3D and 5B which teach even more centralized elements). Alternatively, or additionally, no boundary for where the center exists is defined. See example below.
PNG
media_image1.png
254
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3A of Konishi
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, page 3, line 1: “a first and second row” was introduced on page 2.
Page 2, lines 16-17: The phrasing “a first and second row” should instead state:
“a first and second rows” OR
“a first row and a second row”; and
Page 3, line 1 should instead state
“the first row and the second row” OR
“the first and second rows”.
Claim 1, line 10: "the first bonding wiring" should instead state “a first bonding wiring”.
Claim 2, line 6: “is provided closer to the side of the second side” should instead state “is provided closer to ”.
Claim 2, line 8: “is provided closer to the side of the third side” should instead state “is provided closer to ”.
Claim 3, line 2: “arranged on the side of the third side” should instead state “arranged on ”.
Claim 3, line 4: "the second bonding wiring" should instead state “a second bonding wiring”.
Claim 3, lines 5-6: “located on the side of the third side” should instead state “located on ”.
Claim 6, page 5, lines 7-8: “wherein heat capacity of the first heat capacity portion is larger than heat capacity of the second heat capacity portion” should instead state “wherein a first heat capacity of the first heat capacity portion is larger than a second heat capacity of the second heat capacity portion”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the following terms are not located in the specification and are identified as new matter:
“first frame body” and “second frame body”
Nothing in the specification suggests that there are two frame bodies (first or second) in the optical module. Paragraph [0032], [0046]-[0047], [0050], [0063], [0066], [0070], and [0076] discloses 2g and 2k as frame bodies, but they belong to separate embodiments. Nowhere in the specification discloses the two frame bodies 2g and 2k are present in the same module/ embodiment.
“first frame side”
frame side (including first frame side) is never disclosed within the specification
“second frame side”
frame side (including second frame side) is never disclosed within the specification
“second frame body side”
frame body side (including second frame body side) is never disclosed within the specification
Claims 2-5 are rejected due to their ultimate dependency upon a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 6, the following terms are not located in the specification and are identified as new matter:
“first frame body”
The specification only identifies a frame body and does not identify a first (or any other) frame body. The use of “first” suggests that there ought to be a “second”, but this is not the case.
“first frame side”
frame side is never disclosed within the specification
The examiner recommends using language consistent with the specification to avoid new matter rejections.
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.
Claims 1-6 are 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.
Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1, lines 11-12recites “wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of rows of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, the row is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction…”
The use of “the row” renders the claim indefinite. Since “a plurality of rows” was introduced before “the row”, it is unclear which row of the plurality is being referred to as “the row”. Is it meant to encompass every row? The topmost row? The last row? The center row? Another row? Did the Applicant intend to refer to each row of the plurality of rows?
The examiner is assuming that the claim is meant to read: “wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of rows of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, wherein each row of the plurality of rows is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction…”
Claims 2-5 are rejected due to their ultimate dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claim 1, line 12-13 recites “and has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, the column is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a second direction…”
The use of “the column” renders the claim indefinite. Since “a plurality of columns” was introduced before “the column”, it is unclear which column of the plurality is being referred to as “the column”. Is it meant to encompass every column? The leftmost column? The rightmost column? The last column? The center column? Another column? Did the Applicant intend to refer to each column of the plurality of columns?
The examiner is assuming that the claim is meant to read: “wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, wherein each column of the plurality of columns is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction…”
Claims 2-5 are rejected due to their ultimate dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claim 1, lines 11-14 recites “arranged with spacings”
It is unclear what space is being measured to determine a “spacing” or how the various spacings are to be differentiated throughout the claim. For example, a “spacing” is not claimed to touch the edges of Peltier elements, nor is it claimed to be between Peltier elements directly adjacent to each other in a row or column (wherein rows and columns are parallel to respective side walls or edges of the frame body). There does not appear to be any relationship between what a “spacing” is and the Peltier elements. Claims 2-5 are rejected due to their ultimate dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claim 6, lines 9-10 recites “wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of rows of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, the row is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction…”
The use of “the row” renders the claim indefinite. Since “a plurality of rows” was introduced before “the row”, it is unclear which row of the plurality is being referred to as “the row”. Is it meant to encompass every row? The topmost row? The last row? The center row? Another row? Did the Applicant intend to refer to each row of the plurality of rows?
Claim 6, lines 11-12 recites “a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings, the column is all Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a second direction…”
The use of “the column” renders the claim indefinite. Since “a plurality of columns” was introduced before “the column”, it is unclear which column of the plurality is being referred to as “the column”. Is it meant to encompass every column? The leftmost column? The rightmost column? The last column? The center column? Another column? Did the Applicant intend to refer to each column of the plurality of columns?
Claim 6, lines 4-5 recites “first heat capacity portion located around the optical element and second heat capacity portion located around the optical element.” This renders the claim indefinite because P1 and P2 are only located at the two columns adjacent/closest to the first side and second side respectively. Thus, saying each of the first and second heat capacity portions located around the optical element is not correct.
Claims 2-5 are rejected due to their ultimate dependency upon a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanobe et al. in US 20220357629 A1 – Embodiment 2 (hereinafter "Tanobe 2") in view of Saeki et al. in US 20170184802 A1 (hereinafter "Saeki”).
Regarding claim 1, Tanobe 2 discloses an optical module comprising:
optical element (optical semiconductor element 3 is interpreted as the optical element) having a first side (the side in the +X direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the first side), a second side intersecting the first side (the side in the -Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the second side and intersects the side in the +X direction), and a third side facing the second side (the side in the +Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the third side and faces the side in the -Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B);
a housing (housing 2) having a first and second frame body (the housing 2 has walls; the wall of 2 in the Y-direction is interpreted as the first frame body; the wall of 2 in the X-direction is interpreted as the second frame body; these walls of 2 are interpreted as frame bodies since they frame the inner components of the interpreted optical element 3), and accommodating the optical element (2 is interpreted as accommodating 3 in Fig. 3);
a thermoelectric cooler (Peltier module 12a is interpreted as the thermoelectric cooler) mounted inside the housing (2) and with the optical element (3) being mounted on the thermoelectric cooler (12a; see Fig. 4A);
a driving circuit (driver 4 is interpreted as the driving circuit) arranged on a side of the first side (the side in the +X direction as viewed in Fig. 4B) of the optical element (3);
wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of rows of Peltier elements arranged with spacings (12a has a plurality of rows arranged with spacings; see Annotated Fig. 4B below; p-type and n-type thermoelectric semiconductors 13 and 14 respectively are is interpreted as the plurality of Peltier elements), each row of the plurality of rows has Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction parallel to the first frame body (the rows identified in annotated Fig. 4B is rows of Peltier elements, each arranged with spacings in the Y-direction which is the direction parallel to the above-identified interpretation of the first frame body; the examiner notes that the interpretation of Tanobe is a structure where the interpreted first frame side and first frame body are parallel due to the indicated XYZ orientation provided in Fig. 4B and Fig. 3), and has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings (12a has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings; see Annotated Fig. 4B below), each column of the plurality of columns has Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a second direction parallel to the second frame body (the columns identified in Annotated Fig. 4B is columns of Peltier elements, each arranged with spacings in the X-direction which is parallel to the above-identified interpretation of the second frame body; the examiner noted that the interpretation of Tanobe is a structure where the interpreted second frame side and second frame body are parallel due to the indicated XYZ orientation provided in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4B), and
wherein the plurality of rows is provided with a first and second row arranged sequentially from the first frame side in the second direction (the first and second rows of the plurality of rows is shown in the annotation of Fig. 4B; second direction is X-direction; note that the interpreted first and second rows are shown sequentially in the -X direction from the first frame side, which is also indicated in the annotation), and the plurality of columns is provided with a first and second column arranged sequentially from the second frame side in the first direction (the first and second columns of the plurality of columns is shown in the annotation of Fig. 4B; first direction is the Y-direction; note that the interpreted first and second columns are shown sequentially in the -Y direction from the second frame side, which is also indicated in the annotation),
wherein a spacing between a first and second row is narrower than a spacing between the second row and a third row located in a center of the optical element (a third row in the center of 3 is indicated in the annotation of Fig. 4B; the size comparison is shown on the far right of the annotation of Fig. 4B wherein a spacing between a first and second row is narrower than a spacing between the second row and a third row located in a center), and
wherein a spacing between the first and second row is narrower than a spacing between a first column and a second frame body side (the spacing between the first column and the second frame body side (not shown in annotation) is necessarily wider than the spacing between the first column and the second frame side (shown in annotation) since the second frame body side is a part of the housing which exists outside of 12a; both of these spacings are wider than the spacing indicated between the first and second row in the annotation of Fig. 4B, thus the spacing between the first and second row is narrower than a spacing between a first column and a second frame body side).
PNG
media_image2.png
670
1159
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4B
Tanobe 2 does not disclose a first bonding pad arranged on a side of the second side of the optical element; and a first wiring pattern provided on the first frame body of the housing and connected to the first bonding pad of the optical element through a first bonding wiring.
Saeki discloses a first bonding pad (the first bonding pad is interpreted as the wiring substrates 90b; see Para. 106) arranged on a side of the second side (90b are interpreted as being arranged on any side of the entire device, including the second side of the optical element) of the optical element (laser 100 is interpreted as the optical element); and
a first wiring pattern (the collection of DC terminals 5b is interpreted as the first wiring pattern; see Fig. 2) provided on the first frame body (side wall 2C is interpreted as the first frame body) of the housing (housing 2) and connected to the first bonding pad (wiring substrates 90b; see Para. 106) of the optical element (laser 100) through a first bonding wiring (wires W2 are interpreted as the first bonding wiring; see Fig. 20-21).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the electrical arrangement of Saeki in the optical module of Tanobe 2 for the purpose of providing an optimized electrical connection thereby achieving high-speed signal connection performance, reducing size and costs, and enhancing electrical performance.
Regarding claim 2, Tanobe 2/Saeki discloses the optical module according to claim 1 as discussed above,
wherein the optical element (3) is a multimode interferometer (see Mach-Zehnder optical modulator 30 in Fig. 3; see Para. 42) having a first optical waveguide (34) with a first signal light (see Para. 8-10 which disclose how modulation occurs by demultiplexing a light signal and altering the light to necessarily create two distinct signals) propagating in the first optical waveguide (34) and a second optical waveguide (33) with a second signal light (necessarily created within a functioning Mach-Zehnder optical modulator) different from the first signal light propagating in the second optical waveguide (33),
wherein the first optical waveguide (34) is provided closer to the side of the second side (waveguide 34 is closer to the side that is in the -Y direction as viewed in Fig. 3; further, regions 131 and 133 correspond to regions 132 and 134 in Fig. 4A and 132 and 134 can be seen in Fig. 4B to be on the interpreted second side) than the center (the middle of Fig. 3 in-between 33 and 34 as well as 35 and 36 is interpreted as the center) of the multimode interferometer (30), and
wherein the second optical waveguide (33) is provided closer to the side of the third side (the +Y direction in Fig. 3 and 4B) than the center (the middle of Fig. 3 in-between 33 and 34 as well as 35 and 36 is interpreted as the center) of the multimode interferometer (30).
Regarding claim 3, Tanobe 2/Saeki discloses the optical module according to claim 1 as discussed above, further comprising:
a second bonding pad (the second bonding pad is interpreted as the wiring substrates 90a; see Para. 106) arranged on the side of the third side (the side opposite of 5a; see Fig. 2) of the optical element (100); and
a second wiring pattern (the collection of DC terminals 5a is interpreted as the second wiring pattern; see Fig. 2) provided on the frame body (side wall 2D is interpreted as the frame body) of the housing (housing 2) and connected to the second bonding pad (wiring substrates 90a; see Para. 106) of the optical element (laser 100) through the second bonding wiring (wires W2 are interpreted as the second bonding wiring; see Fig. 20-21),
wherein a spacing between the plurality of Peltier elements located on the side of the third side is narrower than the spacing between the plurality of Peltier elements located in the center of the optical element (the third side is parallel to the second frame side and both exist in the +Y direction, refer to Fig. 4B and 3; the annotation of Fig. 4B below shows an interpretation where a spacing between the plurality of Peltier elements located on the side of the third side is narrower than the spacing between the plurality of Peltier elements located in the center).
PNG
media_image3.png
668
735
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Tanobe 2/Saeki discloses the optical module according to claim 1 as discussed above, further comprising (according to Saeki):
a third bonding pad (RF pad 41 to 44 is interpreted as the third bonding pad) arranged on the side of the first side (see Fig. 2 where the optical modulator 20 is on the first side of 100 and 20 is where the bond occurs) of the optical element (100); and
a third wiring pattern (the collection of radio-frequency terminals 4 is interpreted as the third wiring pattern) provided in the driving circuit (any circuit connecting 4 and 100 is interpreted as the driving circuit) and connected to the third bonding pad (41 to 44) of the optical element (100) through a third bonding wiring (see Para. 178),
and further comprising (according to Tanobe 2):
wherein a spacing (the gap between 13 and 14) between the plurality of Peltier elements (13 and 14) located on the side of the first side (the +X direction) is narrower than the spacing (the gap between 13 and 14) between the plurality of Peltier elements (13 and 14) located in the center of the optical element (note region 138 in Fig. 6B where 13 and 14 are more densely packed than the region between 137 and 138 which contains the center of 15 which is equivalent to the center of 3).
Regarding claim 5, Tanobe 2/Saeki discloses the optical module according to claim 1 as discussed above,
wherein the driving circuit (4) is a heating element (see Para. 47).
Regarding claim 6, Tanobe 2 discloses an optical module comprising:
an optical element (optical semiconductor element 3 is interpreted as the optical element) having a first side (the side in the +X direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the first side), a second side (the side in the -Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the second side) intersecting the first side (the side in the +X direction as viewed in Fig. 4B), and a third side (the side in the +Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B is interpreted as the third side) facing the second side (the side in the -Y direction as viewed in Fig. 4B);
a housing (housing 2) having a first and second frame body (the housing 2 has walls; the wall of 2 in the Y-direction is interpreted as the first frame body; the wall of 2 in the X-direction is interpreted as the second frame body; these walls of 2 are interpreted as frame bodies since they frame the inner components of the interpreted optical element 3), and accommodating the optical element (2 is interpreted as accommodating 3 in Fig. 3);
a thermoelectric cooler (Peltier module 12a is interpreted as the thermoelectric cooler) disposed inside the housing (2), with the optical element (3) being mounted on the thermoelectric cooler (12a; see Fig. 4A);
a first heat capacity portion located around the optical element (all of the elements with the device are “located around” the optical element; the interpretation of the first heat capacity portion is six densely packed elements in the annotation of Fig. 4B below); and
a second heat capacity portion located around the optical element and at a position different from the first heat capacity portion (all of the elements with the device are “located around” the optical element; the interpretation of the second heat capacity portion is four elements sparsely packed in the annotation of Fig. 4B below; note this position is different from the interpreted first heat capacity portion),
wherein a first heat capacity of the first heat capacity portion is larger than a second heat capacity of the second heat capacity portion (note that fewer elements more sparsely placed about is necessarily capable of producing less heat than a larger number of more tightly packed elements and vice versa, thus the first heat capacity of the first heat capacity portion is larger than the second heat capacity of the second heat capacity portion),
wherein the thermoelectric cooler has a plurality of rows of Peltier elements arranged with spacings (12a has a plurality of rows arranged with spacings; see Annotated Fig. 4B below; p-type and n-type thermoelectric semiconductors 13 and 14 respectively are is interpreted as the plurality of Peltier elements), each row of the plurality of rows has Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a first direction parallel to the first frame body (the rows identified in annotated Fig. 4B is rows of Peltier elements, each arranged with spacings in the Y-direction which is the direction parallel to the above-identified interpretation of the first frame body; the examiner notes that the interpretation of Tanobe is a structure where the interpreted first frame side and first frame body are parallel due to the indicated XYZ orientation provided in Fig. 4B and Fig. 3), and has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings (12a has a plurality of columns of Peltier elements arranged with spacings; see Annotated Fig. 4B below), each column of the plurality of columns has Peltier elements arranged with spacings in a second direction parallel to the second frame body (the columns identified in Annotated Fig. 4B is columns of Peltier elements, each arranged with spacings in the X-direction which is parallel to the above-identified interpretation of the second frame body; the examiner noted that the interpretation of Tanobe is a structure where the interpreted second frame side and second frame body are parallel due to the indicated XYZ orientation provided in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4B), and
wherein the plurality of rows is provided with a first and second row arranged sequentially from the first frame side in the second direction (the first and second rows of the plurality of rows is shown in the annotation of Fig. 4B; second direction is X-direction; note that the interpreted first and second rows are shown sequentially in the -X direction from the first frame side, which is also indicated in the annotation), and the plurality of columns is provided with a first and second column arranged sequentially from the second frame side in the first direction (the first and second columns of the plurality of columns is shown in the annotation of Fig. 4B; first direction is the Y-direction; note that the interpreted first and second columns are shown sequentially in the -Y direction from the second frame side, which is also indicated in the annotation),
wherein a spacing between a first and second row is narrower than a spacing between the second row and a third row located in a center of the optical element (a third row in the center of 3 is indicated in the annotation of Fig. 4B; the size comparison is shown on the far right of the annotation of Fig. 4B wherein a spacing between a first and second row is narrower than a spacing between the second row and a third row located in a center), and
wherein a spacing between the first and second row is narrower than a spacing between a first column and a second frame body side (the spacing between the first column and the second frame body side (not shown in annotation) is necessarily wider than the spacing between the first column and the second frame side (shown in annotation) since the second frame body side is a part of the housing which exists outside of 12a; both of these spacings are wider than the spacing indicated between the first and second row in the annotation of Fig. 4B, thus the spacing between the first and second row is narrower than a spacing between a first column and a second frame body side).
PNG
media_image4.png
668
462
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARBY M THOMASON whose telephone number is (703)756-5817. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 8am-5pm.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/DARBY M. THOMASON/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights