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 .
Detailed Action
Drawings Objection
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations “a core of the first plurality of spacer connectors extends along a sidewall of the UBMs” in Claim 1, “the plurality of solder connectors extend through the solder resist and further extend continuously from the UBMs to the contact pads in the solder resist” in Claim 17, and “a diameter of a first solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features” in Claim 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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 1-10, 12 and 17-25 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. The limitations “a core of the first plurality of spacer connectors extends along a sidewall of the UBMs” in Claim 1, “the plurality of solder connectors extend through the solder resist and further extend continuously from the UBMs to the contact pads in the solder resist” in Claim 17, and “a diameter of a first solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features” in Claim 21 are not disclosed in the application as originally filed. Claims 2-10, 12, 18-20 and 22-25 depend from Claims 1, 17 and 21.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Claims 1 and 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daekerdi (CN 1182957) of record.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 5 of Daekerdi discloses a package comprising: a first package component (1) comprising a plurality of underbump metallizations (UBMs 34); a second package component (24) bonded to the first package component by a first plurality of solder connectors (11); and a first plurality of spacer connectors (33) extending from the first package component to the second package component, wherein a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a different material than the first plurality of solder connectors, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a solder-plated core, and wherein a core of the first plurality of spacer connectors extends along a sidewall of the UBMs: and an underfill (122) surrounding the first plurality of spacer connectors (high meting point solder) and the first plurality of solder connectors (eutectic lead/tin, lead/bismuth, tin/bismuth, tin/indium alloy).
Regarding Claim 2
FIG. 4 of Daekerdi discloses the first spacer connector (33) of the first plurality of spacer connectors is disposed in a corner region of the second package component in a plan view.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
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 4-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wirz (CN 110651364) of record, in view of Daekerdi (CN 1182957) of record.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 3 of Wirz discloses a package comprising: a first package component (104a) comprising a plurality (FIG. 1) of underbump metallizations (UBMs 118); a second package component (104b) bonded to the first package component by a first plurality of solder connectors (114); and a first plurality of spacer connectors (120) extending from the first package component to the second package component, wherein a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height (g1) of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a different material than the first plurality of solder connectors, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a solder-plated core, and wherein a core of the first plurality of spacer connectors extends along a sidewall of the UBMs: and an underfill (122) surrounding the first plurality of spacer connectors.
Wirz is silent with respect to an underfill surrounding the first plurality of solder connectors.
FIG. 5 of Daekerdi discloses a similar package, comprising a first package component (1) comprising a plurality of underbump metallizations (UBMs 34); a second package component (24) bonded to the first package component by a first plurality of solder connectors (11); and a first plurality of spacer connectors (33) extending from the first package component to the second package component, wherein a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors; and an underfill (29) surrounding the first plurality of spacer connectors (33) and the first plurality of solder connectors (11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wirz, as taught by Daekerdi. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Wirz in the above manner for purpose of providing structural reinforcement (Abstract of Daekerdi).
Regarding Claim 4
FIG. 3 of Wirz discloses the second package component comprises an insulating layer (108), and wherein the first plurality of solder connectors and the first plurality of spacer connectors each extend through the insulating layer.
Regarding Claim 5
FIG. 3 of Wirz discloses the second package component comprises an insulating layer, wherein the first plurality of solder connectors extends through the insulating layer, and wherein the insulating layer covers a bottom surface of the first plurality of spacer connectors.
Regarding Claim 6
FIG. 3 of Wirz discloses the first plurality of spacer connectors (120) is adhered to a top surface of the insulating layer by an adhesive (bonding material).
Claims 1-3, 8-10, 12 and 17-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0296002) of record, in view of Lu (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0082798) of record.
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 13 of Pei discloses a package comprising: a first package component (100) comprising a plurality of underbump metallizations (UBMs) (110/160); a second package component (200) bonded to the first package component by a first plurality of solder connectors (164); and a first plurality of spacer connectors (168) extending from the first package component to the second package component, wherein a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a solder-plated core, and wherein a core of the first plurality of spacer connectors extends along a sidewall of the UBMs; and an underfill [0053] surrounding the plurality of solder connectors and the plurality of spacer connectors.
Pei is silent with respect to “the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a different material than the first plurality of solder connectors”.
FIG. 6 of Lu discloses a similar package, wherein the first plurality of spacer connectors (682) comprises a different material than the first plurality of solder connectors (681).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pei, as taught by Lu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Pei in the above manner for purpose of improving yield in assembly processes ([0001] of Lu).
Regarding Claim 2
FIG. 4 of Lu discloses the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is disposed in a corner region of the second package component in a plan view.
Regarding Claim 3
FIG. 4 of Lu discloses the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is disposed at a center point of the second package component in a plan view.
Regarding Claim 8
FIG. 2 of Lu discloses each of the first plurality of solder connectors physically contacts a respective conductive pad of a plurality of conductive pads of the first package component, and wherein the diameter of the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a diameter of a first conductive pad of the plurality of conductive pads in a plan view (FIG. 4).
Regarding Claim 9
FIG. 2 of Lu discloses the diameter of the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is in a range of 40µm to 150µm, and wherein the diameter of the first conductive pad of the plurality of conductive pads in a plan view is in a range of 20µm to 100µm [0030]. Furthermore, said dimensions are related to the device size and materials. Therefore, said dimensions are considered to be a result effective variable. The claim to specific dimensions therefore constitutes an optimization of ranges. In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the parameters as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 10
FIG. 2 of Lu discloses each of the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a rubber ball, a copper-cored ball, or a plastic ball [0029].
Regarding Claim 12
FIG. 2 of Lu discloses a second plurality of solder connectors on a surface of the second package component opposite to the first package component; and a second plurality of spacer connectors on the surface of the second package component opposite to the first package component, wherein a diameter of a second spacer connector of the second plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a second solder connector of the second plurality of solder connectors, and wherein the second plurality of spacer connectors comprises a different material than the second plurality of solder connectors.
Regarding Claim 17
FIG. 13 of Pei discloses a package comprising: a package substrate (100, FIG. 10) comprising a solder resist (108/112) at an exterior surface of the package substrate; and contact pads (110) in the solder resist; a package component (200) bonded to the package substrate by a plurality of solder [0035] connectors (164-166), wherein package component comprises a plurality of underbump metallizations (UBMs under 166) extending through an insulating layer, and wherein the plurality of solder connectors extend through the solder resist and further extend continuously from the UBMs to the contact pads in the solder resist; a plurality of spacer connectors (168) physically spacing the package substrate apart from the package component, wherein the plurality of spacer connectors is disposed at least in corner regions of the package substrate in a plan view (FIG. 15); and an underfill [0053] surrounding the plurality of solder connectors and the plurality of spacer connectors.
Pei is silent with respect to “a diameter of a spacer connector of the plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors”.
FIG. 6 of Lu discloses a similar package, wherein a diameter of a spacer connector (682) of the plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a solder connector (681) of the plurality of solder connectors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pei, as taught by Lu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Pei in the above manner for purpose of improving yield in assembly processes ([0001] of Lu).
Regarding Claim 18
FIG. 15 of Pei discloses the plurality of spacer connectors (168) is further disposed at a center of the package substrate in the plan view.
Regarding Claim 19
FIG. 2 of Lu discloses each of the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a rubber ball, a copper-cored ball, or a plastic ball [0029].
Regarding Claim 20
FIG. 13 of Pei discloses the plurality of spacer connectors (168) extends through the solder resist.
Claim 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daekerdi, in view of Prasad (U.S. Patent No. 6,281,452) of record.
Regarding Claim 7
Daekerdi discloses Claim 1.
Daekerdi is silent with respect to “the diameter of the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is in a range of 40µm to 150µm, and wherein the height of the first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors is in a range of 30µm to 100µm”.
Prasad discloses a similar package, wherein the diameter of the first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is in a range of 40µm to 150µm, and wherein the height of the first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors is in a range of 30µm to 100µm (Col. 9, Lines 21-32).
Furthermore, said dimensions are related to the device size and materials. Therefore, said dimensions are considered to be a result effective variable. The claim to specific dimensions therefore constitutes an optimization of ranges. In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the parameters as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Daekerdi, as taught by Prasad. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Daekerdi in the above manner for purpose of providing a structure for mounting electronic devices (Col. 5, Lines 10-26 of Prasad).
Claims 17, 21 and 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0318878), in view of Pu (U.S. Patent No. 6,350,669) of record.
Regarding Claim 17
FIG. 1 of Tanaka discloses a package comprising: a package substrate (12) comprising a solder resist (17) at an exterior surface of the package substrate; and contact pads (12c) in the solder resist; a package component (20) bonded to the package substrate by a plurality of solder connectors (18 within 10), wherein the package component comprises a plurality of underbump metallizations (UBMs 20b) extending through an insulating layer (17), and wherein the plurality of solder connectors extend through the solder resist and further extend continuously from the UBMs to the contact pads in the solder resist; a plurality of spacer connectors (18 within 30) physically spacing the package substrate apart from the package component wherein the plurality of spacer connectors is disposed at least in corner regions of the package substrate in a plan view (FIG. 2); and an underfill (18a) surrounding the plurality of solder connectors and the plurality of spacer connectors.
Tanaka is silent with respect to “a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors is larger than a height of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors”.
FIG. 2 of Pu discloses a similar package, wherein a diameter of a first spacer connector of the first plurality of spacer connectors (222) is larger than a height of a first solder connector of the first plurality of solder connectors (221).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tanaka, as taught by Pu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Tanaka in the above manner for purpose of preventing collapsing during solder-reflow process (Col. 2, Lines 18-21 of Pu).
Regarding Claim 21
FIG. 1 of Tanaka discloses a package comprising: a first package component (12) comprising a first insulating layer (17) at an exterior surface of the first package component and a first plurality of conductive features (12c) in the first insulating layer; a second package component (20) comprising a second insulating layer (17) at an exterior surface of the second package component and a second plurality of conductive features (20b) in the second insulating layer; a plurality of solder connectors (18 within 10) bonding the first plurality of conductive features to the second plurality of conductive features; a plurality of spacer connectors (18 within 30) between the first package component and the second package component, wherein the plurality of spacer connectors interfaces a lateral surface of the first insulating layer; and an underfill (18a) surrounding the plurality of solder connectors and the plurality of spacer connectors.
Tanaka is silent with respect to “a diameter of a first solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features”.
FIG. 2 of Pu discloses a similar package, wherein a diameter of a first solder connector (221) of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features (211) to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features (201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tanaka, as taught by Pu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Tanaka in the above manner for purpose of preventing collapsing during solder-reflow process (Col. 2, Lines 18-21 of Pu).
Regarding Claim 22
FIG. 1 of Tanaka discloses the plurality of spacer connectors is attached to a lateral surface of the second insulating layer by an adhesive (18a), wherein the adhesive is disposed between and extends continuously from the lateral surface of the second insulating layer (17) to lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors, and wherein the lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors face the lateral surface of the second insulating layer.
Claims 21, 23 and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei, in view of Sidhu (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2014/0319682)
Regarding Claim 21
Pei discloses a package comprising: a first package component (100, FIG. 10) comprising a first insulating layer (108/112) at an exterior surface of the first package component and a first plurality of conductive features (110) in the first insulating layer; a second package component (200, FIG. 11) comprising a second insulating layer at an exterior surface of the second package component and a second plurality of conductive features in the second insulating layer; a plurality of solder connectors (164) bonding the first plurality of conductive features to the second plurality of conductive features (FIG. 13); a plurality of spacer connectors (168) between the first package component and the second package component, wherein the plurality of spacer connectors interfaces a lateral surface of the first insulating layer; and an underfill surrounding the plurality of solder connectors and the plurality of spacer connectors [0053].
Pei is silent with respect to “a diameter of a first solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features”.
FIG. 1 of Sidhu discloses a similar package, comprising: a first package component (122); a second package component (104); a first plurality of conductive features (117); a second plurality of conductive features (110); a plurality of solder connectors (112) bonding the first plurality of conductive features to the second plurality of conductive features; a plurality of spacer connectors (114) between the first package component and the second package component, wherein a diameter of a first solder connector of the plurality of solder connectors is greater than a vertical distance measured from a lateral surface of a first conductive feature of the first plurality of conductive features to a lateral surface of a second conductive feature of the second plurality of conductive features.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pei, as taught by Sidhu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Pei in the above manner for purpose of accommodating package substrates having thinner IC devices and/or larger thermal solution ([0002] of Sidhu).
Regarding Claim 23
FIG. 1 of Sidhu discloses each of the first plurality of spacer connectors comprises a rubber ball, a copper-cored ball, or a plastic ball [0036].
Regarding Claim 24
FIG. 1 of Sidhu discloses each of the first plurality of spacer connectors (114) is solder plated, and the plurality of spacer connectors is attached to a third plurality of conductive features in the second insulating layer.
Claim 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei and Sidhu, in view of Fu (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2016/0148864).
Regarding Claim 22
Pei as modified by Sidhu discloses Claim 21.
Pei as modified by Sidhu is silent with respect to “the plurality of spacer connectors is attached to a lateral surface of the second insulating layer by an adhesive, wherein the adhesive is disposed between and extends continuously from the lateral surface of the second insulating layer to lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors, and wherein the lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors face the lateral surface of the second insulating layer”.
FIG. 3 of Fu discloses a similar package, wherein the plurality of spacer connectors (356) is attached to a lateral surface of the second insulating layer (327) by an adhesive (366), wherein the adhesive is disposed between and extends continuously from the lateral surface of the second insulating layer to lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors, and wherein the lateral surfaces of the plurality of spacer connectors face the lateral surface of the second insulating layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pei, as taught by Fu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Pei in the above manner for purpose of reliable joints to ensure better quality and performance ([0011] of Fu).
Claim 25 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wirz and Daekerdi, in view of Shunji (U.S. Patent No. 3,350,181).
Regarding Claim 25
Wirz as modified by Daekerdi discloses Claim 6.
Wirz as modified by Daekerdi is silent with respect to “the adhesive is an epoxy glue”.
FIG. 1 of Shunji discloses a similar package, wherein the adhesive is an epoxy glue.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wirz, as taught by Shunji. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Wirz in the above manner for purpose of firmly bonding (Col. 1, Lines 43-56 of Shunji).
Pertinent Art
Labonte (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0140361), Zhang (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2016/0379923) and Rubin (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0134728).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1, 17 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection
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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG-BAI ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-3904. The examiner can normally be reached on 11am – 7pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chad Dicke can be reached on (571)270-7996. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHENG-BAI ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights