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 on 26 May 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 10, and 18 are currently amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined herein.
All previous rejections are withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
New rejections follow.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 1, 4, and 5 be found allowable, claims 10, 12, and 13, respectively, will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being substantial duplicates thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 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.
At line 5, claim 3 recites a limitation, “wherein the thermal interface material is disposed between each of the plurality of cooling channels and contacts a surface . . .”, which is indefinite because it does not state what other structure besides the cooling channels the thermal interface material is placed between (i.e. between each of the plurality of cooling channels and what structure?) As previously recited and disclosed, the interface material is disposed between each of the cooling channels and the outer surface of the cell casing, and the claim is examined accordingly below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuhr (US 2011/0135975 A1) in view of Kretschmar (DE 102019210765 A1; machine translation relied upon herein) and Kwag. (US 2021/0167343 A1)
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Fuhr teaches a battery assembly 22 comprising:
A battery cell 24 having a cell casing provided with an outer casing surface 108 (see Fuhr Figure 19 below). The outer casing surface 108 has a first plurality of grooves formed therein.
Fuhr Figure 19
PNG
media_image1.png
222
290
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A battery cell holder 42 having a plurality of cell pockets 44, wherein each of the cell pockets 44 has a wall and a wall surface (see Fuhr Figure 21 below)
Fuhr Figure 21
PNG
media_image2.png
250
310
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fuhr further suggests circulation of cooling fluid or gas, but does not specifically teach a means of doing so. (e.g. Para [0036], [0088])
Fuhr does not teach:
the wall surface has a second plurality of grooves that interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing; and wherein the interaction of the first plurality of grooves on the cell casing with the second plurality of grooves on the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets cooperate to prevent the battery cell from moving relative to the battery cell holder.
a plurality of cooling channels, wherein each of the plurality of cooling channels are disposed in the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets, and a heat exchange fluid disposed within the cooling channels.
Kretschmar teaches a battery module 1 comprising a battery cell 2 having a cell casing 3 provided with an outer casing surface 11 (see Kretschmar Annotated Fig. 1 below). The outer casing surface has a first plurality of grooves 5, 6 formed therein. Furthermore Kretschmar teaches a battery cell holder 4 having a plurality of cell pockets 8, wherein each of the cell pockets 8 has a wall 10 and a wall surface (see Annotated Kretschmar Fig. 1 below), wherein the wall surface has a plurality of grooves that interact with the grooves 5, 6 on the outer surface of the cell casing; and wherein the interaction of the grooves 5, 6 on the cell casing 3 with the grooves on the wall 10 of each of the plurality of cell pockets cooperate to prevent the battery cell from moving relative to the battery cell holder 4.
Kretschmar Figure 1
PNG
media_image3.png
564
935
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fuhr and Kretschmar are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of battery modules. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery holder, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall was provided with a corresponding surface for locking the cells in place, as taught by Kretschmar. The result of securely locking the cells in place would also have been reasonably predictable (see paragraphs [0031-0032] of Kretschmar machine translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery cell assembly, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall surface had a second plurality of grooves that correspond to and interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Kwag is relied upon to teach the design of a cooling system for a battery pack of design similar to Fuhr. The cooling system provides channels (F/115) that pass vertically through cell holder 110 and through the interstitial spaces between the cylindrical cells of the pack. (Figures 1, 4, 5; Para. [0063]-[0070]) The cooling channels contain a heat exchange fluid (Para. [0055]; “cooling medium”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the battery assembly of Fuhr by installing vertical cooling channels that run through the cell holder and the interstitial spaces between cells, as taught by Kwag, for the purpose of managing the temperature of the cells, because Fuhr suggests such cooling and Kwag teaches a cooling channel design to achieve such cooling in a similar battery pack. (Fuhr Para [0036], [0088]). In addition, one having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to combine the elements by known methods, and in the combination, each element simply performs the same function it does separately. The result of the combination would have been predictable – i.e. the cooling of the cells to avoid the known ill effects of excessive heating. (MPEP 2143(I)(A)) Within such a combination, the cooling channels would pass through the surfaces of tray 42 between three adjacent sockets 44 (See Fig. 21, 27 of Fuhr) This would place cooling channels containing heat exchange fluid within the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets as claimed.
Regarding claims 4 and 12, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 10, as addressed above. Modified Fuhr, in view of Kretschmar, further teaches the limitations of claims 4 and 12.
Modified Fuhr does not teach:
a first and a second end, wherein a first plurality of the first plurality of grooves is formed in the cell casing surface at the first end of the cell casing and a second plurality of the first plurality of grooves are formed in the cell casing surface at the second end of the cell casing.
Kretschmar teaches a battery module 1 comprising a plurality of battery cells 2, each having a cell casing (see Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1 below), wherein the cell casing has a first end and a second end, wherein a first plurality 5 of the first plurality of grooves 5, 6 is formed at the first end of the cell casing and a second plurality 6 of the first plurality of grooves 5, 6 are formed in the cell casing surface at the second end of the cell casing (see Kretschmar Annotated Fig. 1 below).
Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1
PNG
media_image4.png
544
912
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fuhr and Kretschmar are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of battery modules. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the cell casing having a plurality of grooves, as taught by Fuhr, such that the cell casing was provided with a plurality of grooves at both a first end and at a second end of the cell casing for locking the cells in place, as taught by Kretschmar. The result of securely locking the cells in place would also have been reasonably predictable (see paragraphs [0031-0032] of Kretschmar Machine Translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the cell casing of the cells having a plurality of grooves, as taught by Fuhr, such that a plurality of grooves was provided at both a first end and at a second end of the cell casing, as taught by Kretschmar, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Regarding claims 5 and 13, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claims 4 and 12, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the first plurality of grooves is formed in the first wall portion, and is provided with a first wall thickness (See Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 below).
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image5.png
871
1040
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 5, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the second wall portion has a second wall thickness, wherein the thickness of the second wall portion is less than the thickness of the first wall portion (see Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 above).
Regarding claim 7, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 6, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the second wall portion is disposed at one of the ends of the cell casing (see Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 above).
Regarding claim 8, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 6, as addressed above. Modified Fuhr, in view of Kretschmar, further teach the limitations of claim 8, addressed below.
Fuhr does not teach:
the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets has first and a second end, wherein a first plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the first end of each of the plurality of cell pockets and a second plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the second end of each of the plurality of cell pockets.
Kretschmar teaches that the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets has first and a second end (see Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1 below), wherein a first plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the first end of each of the plurality of cell pockets and a second plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the second end of each of the plurality of cell pockets (see Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1 below).
Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1
PNG
media_image4.png
544
912
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fuhr and Kretschmar are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of battery modules. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery holder, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall was provided with a corresponding surface for locking the cells in place, as taught by Kretschmar. The result of securely locking the cells in place would also have been reasonably predictable (see paragraphs [0031-0032] of Kretschmar Machine Translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery cell assembly, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall surface had a second plurality of grooves that correspond to and interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Regarding claim 9, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the battery cell holder 42 has a protrusion that extends from an end of the battery cell holder and wherein the protrusion and the end of the casing define a vent gas passage 50 (see Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 below).
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image6.png
668
741
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 10, as addressed above.
Withing the combination in view of Kwag, a cooling channel will pass through the material of tray 42 between sockets 44.
While Fuhr does not explicitly label the material of tray 42 as a “thermal interface material” for the purpose of “promoting heat transfer,” it occupies the exact physical interface where heat transfer must occur between the cell and the cooling channel passing through the tray. Since the material of tray 42 will conduct at least some heat, it is considered to correspond to the claimed “thermal interface material”, broadly recited.
Regarding claim 14, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 13, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the second wall portion has a second wall thickness, wherein the thickness of the second wall portion is less than the thickness of the first wall portion (see Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 below), wherein a portion of the cell casing separates from the cell casing at the second wall thickness to release a gas from the cell casing (see Fig. 10A below; Para [0057]).
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image7.png
645
770
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fuhr Annotated Figure 10A
PNG
media_image8.png
668
674
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 14, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the second wall portion is disposed at one of the ends of the cell casing (See Fig. 20 above)
Regarding claim 16, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 15, as addressed above. For the reasons above in addressing Claim 8, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery cell assembly, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall surface had a second plurality of grooves that correspond to and interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Regarding claim 17, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 10, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the battery cell holder 42 has a protrusion that extends from an end of the battery cell holder and wherein the protrusion and the end of the casing define a vent gas passage 50
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image6.png
668
741
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Fuhr teaches a battery assembly 22 comprising:
A battery cell 24 having a cell casing provided with an outer casing surface 108 (see Fuhr Fig. 19 below). The outer casing surface 108 has a first plurality of grooves formed therein.
Fuhr Figure 19
PNG
media_image1.png
222
290
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A battery cell holder 42 having a plurality of cell pockets 44, wherein each of the cell pockets 44 has a wall and a wall surface (see Fuhr Annotated Fig. 21 below)
Fuhr Figure 21
PNG
media_image2.png
250
310
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the cell casing has a first wall portion and a second wall portion, wherein the first wall portion has a first wall thickness, wherein the first plurality of grooves is formed in the first wall portion, (See Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 below). wherein the second wall portion has a second wall thickness, and wherein the second wall thickness is less than the first wall thickness of the first wall portion (See Fuhr Annotated Fig. 20 below);
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image9.png
632
755
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Fuhr further suggests circulation of cooling fluid or gas, but does not specifically teach a means of doing so. (e.g. Para [0036], [0088])
Fuhr does not teach:
the wall surface has a second plurality of grooves that interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing; and wherein the interaction of the first plurality of grooves on the cell casing with the second plurality of grooves on the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets cooperate to prevent the battery cell from moving relative to the battery cell holder.
a plurality of cooling channels, wherein each of the plurality of cooling channels are disposed in the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets, and a heat exchange fluid disposed within the cooling channels.
Kretschmar teaches a battery module 1 comprising a battery cell 2 having a cell casing 3 provided with an outer casing surface 11 (see Kretschmar Annotated Fig. 1 below). The outer casing surface has a first plurality of grooves 5, 6 formed therein. Furthermore Kretschmar teaches a battery cell holder 4 having a plurality of cell pockets 8, wherein each of the cell pockets 8 has a wall 10 and a wall surface (see Annotated Kretschmar Fig. 1 below), wherein the wall surface has a plurality of grooves that interact with the grooves 5, 6 on the outer surface of the cell casing; and wherein the interaction of the grooves 5, 6 on the cell casing 3 with the grooves on the wall 10 of each of the plurality of cell pockets cooperate to prevent the battery cell from moving relative to the battery cell holder 4.
Kretschmar Figure 1
PNG
media_image3.png
564
935
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fuhr and Kretschmar are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of battery modules. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery holder, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall was provided with a corresponding surface for locking the cells in place, as taught by Kretschmar. The result of securely locking the cells in place would also have been reasonably predictable (see paragraphs [0031-0032] of Kretschmar machine translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery cell assembly, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall surface had a second plurality of grooves that correspond to and interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Kwag is relied upon to teach the design of a cooling system for a battery pack of design similar to Fuhr. The cooling system provides channels (F/115) that pass vertically through cell holder 110 and through the interstitial spaces between the cylindrical cells of the pack. (Figures 1, 4, 5; Para. [0063]-[0070]) The cooling channels contain a heat exchange fluid (Para. [0055]; “cooling medium”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the battery assembly of Fuhr by installing vertical cooling channels that run through the cell holder and the interstitial spaces between cells, as taught by Kwag, for the purpose of managing the temperature of the cells, because Fuhr suggests such cooling and Kwag teaches a cooling channel design to achieve such cooling in a similar battery pack. (Fuhr Para [0036], [0088]). In addition, one having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to combine the elements by known methods, and in the combination, each element simply performs the same function it does separately. The result of the combination would have been predictable – i.e. the cooling of the cells to avoid the known ill effects of excessive heating. Within such a combination, the cooling channels would pass through the surfaces of tray 42 between three adjacent sockets 44 (See Fig. 21, 27 of Fuhr) This would place cooling channels containing heat exchange fluid within the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets as claimed.
Regarding claim 19, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 18, as addressed above. Modified Fuhr, in view of Kretschmar, further teach the limitations of claim 19, addressed below.
Fuhr does not teach:
the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets has first and a second end, wherein a first plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the first end of each of the plurality of cell pockets and a second plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the second end of each of the plurality of cell pockets.
Kretschmar teaches that each of the plurality of cell pockets has first and a second end, wherein a first plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the first end of each of the plurality of cell pockets and a second plurality of the second plurality of grooves are formed on the surface of the wall at the second end of each of the plurality of cell pockets (see Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1 below).
Kretschmar Annotated Figure 1
PNG
media_image4.png
544
912
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fuhr and Kretschmar are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of battery modules. A skilled artisan would have been capable of modifying the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery holder, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall was provided with a corresponding surface for locking the cells in place, as taught by Kretschmar. The result of securely locking the cells in place would also have been reasonably predictable (see paragraphs [0031-0032] of Kretschmar Machine Translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the wall of each of the plurality of cell pockets of the battery cell assembly, as taught by Fuhr, such that the wall surface had a second plurality of grooves that correspond to and interact with the first plurality of grooves on the outer surface of the cell casing, for the purpose of securing the battery cells in place.
Regarding claim 20, modified Fuhr teaches the limitations of claim 18, as addressed above. Fuhr further teaches that the battery cell holder 42 has a protrusion that extends from an end of the battery cell holder and wherein the protrusion and the end of the casing define a vent gas passage 50 (see Fuhr Fig. 10A above).
Fuhr Annotated Figure 20
PNG
media_image6.png
668
741
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuhr, Kretschmar, and Kwag as applied to claims 1 and 4-20 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (CN 216389517 U; citations are to the attached machine translation)
Modified Fuhr teaches a battery cell assembly as described above in addressing claim 1, and suggests air as the heat exchange fluid. (Para. [0057])
Modified Fuhr does not teach a system in which the heat exchange fluid is ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol, or polyalkylene glycol.
Yang et al demonstrates that air and ethylene glycol are known equivalent heat exchange media for cooling or heating battery cell assemblies (Paragraph bridging p. 9-10 of the translation)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the battery pack of modified Fuhr by replacing the air coolant with ethylene glycol, as taught by Yang et al, because it is recognized in the art as similarly suitable for the heat exchange function. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been fully capable of making such a substitution, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (MPEP 3143(I)(B))
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuhr, Kretschmar, and Kwag as applied to claims 1 and 4-20 above, and further in view of Tennessen et al. (US 2011/0206969 A1)
Modified Fuhr teaches a battery cell assembly as described above in addressing claim 1. Modified Fuhr includes cooling channels passing through the cell holder. Fuhr further teaches that the walls of each of the cell pockets 44 have first and second ends (e.g. top and bottom ends of 44 as shown in Figure 27). The surface of the wall of the cell pockets contacts the outer casing surface of the cell casing of the battery cell. (Fuhr Fig. 10), and with the modification to provide a cooling channel passing through 42, the material of the wall of the cell pockets contacts a surface of the cooling channels.
Modified Fuhr does not explicitly teach a window disposed within the wall between the first and second ends that comprises a thermal interface material that comprises a thermally conductive acrylic interface pad disposed in the window, wherein the thermal interface material is disposed between each of the plurality of cooling channels and contacts a surface of the cooling channels.
Tennessen et al teaches a design for a cooling channel in which a thermal interface layer 703 comprising an acrylic-based material is provided between cooling channel 701 and cell 203. (Figures 7, 9, 10 para [0049])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Fuhr by providing thermally conductive acrylic at the interface between the cell casing and the cooling channel (i.e. contacting the cell casing and a surface of the cooling channel), including at the portion within the wall of cell pocket 44, for the purpose of improving heat removal efficiency. (Para. [0007]) Provision of the acrylic material at this position meets the instant limitations to a window disposed within the wall between the first and second end that comprises a thermally conductive acrylic material that comprises a thermally conductive acrylic interface pad disposed in the window.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Jeffrey Barton, whose telephone number is (571) 272-1307. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30 AM – 6:00 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.
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.
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 28 August 2026
Prosecution Insights