DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
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 “forming … second transistors in the peripheral region, … the second transistors being buried channel array transistors, forming … second trenches in the peripheral region, forming … second gate insulating films along inner sidewalls of the second trenches, and filling … portions of the second trenches with second metal layers by forming … the second metal layers on the second gate insulating films …” (claim 16) 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “22” has been used to designate both “cell isolation film” and “region isolation film”. 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. 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.
Specification
The amendment filed May 19, 2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: [0126], lines 6-11 (note: Figs. 5-13 are corresponding to a method of forming elements in a cell region, exclude forming elements in a peripheral region).
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 5-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: inconsistent terminologies. “The active regions” should read “the plurality of active regions” (claims 1 and 13), the wordline trenches” should read “the plurality of wordline trenches” (claims 1, 2, 9-12 and 13-15), “the device isolation film” should read (the at least one device isolation film” (claims 1 and 13), and “the pre-metal layer” should read “the at least one pre-metal layer” (claims 9 and 13). Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-15 and 19 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. There is no support in the specification for the claim limitations of “… a plurality of active regions, which are spaced apart from one another by at least one device isolation film”, as recited in claims 1 and 13; and “after the forming the first transistors: forming capping conductive films, each of which is formed on each of the first transistors within the first trenches”, as recited in claim 19 (note: Fig. 5 and corresponding paragraph(s) show/disclose that a gate structure 110 (which is a part of a transistor) includes a capping conductive film).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. There is no support in the specification for the claim limitation of “after the forming the first transistors: forming capping conductive films, each of which is formed on each of the first transistors within the first trenches”, as recited in claim 19 because the disclosure does not enable an artisan to form capping conductive films, each of which is formed on each of the first transistors within the first trenches after forming the first transistors since each capping conductive film is a part of the transistor).
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 1-3, 5-17 and 19 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.
Claims 1 and 13 recite the limitation “the wordline trench” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The claimed limitation of "inner sidewalls of the … trenches", as recited in claims 1, 13 and 16, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one relationship between the inner sidewall and the … trench applicant refers.
Claims 2, 7 and 8 recite the limitation "the filling the portion of the wordline trenches using the SFD method" in lines 2 and 1-2, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, it is unclear as to whether said limitation is the same as or different from “filling the portion of each of the wordline trenches with a metal layer using a supercritical fluid deposition (SFD) method”, as recited in claim 1.
The claimed limitation of "removing portions of the pre-metal layer", as recited in claims 9 and 13, is unclear as to removing portions of the pre-metal layer of which element(s) applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of "… gate insulating films along inner sidewalls of the … trenches", as recited in claim 16, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one relationship between the … gate insulating film and the inner sidewall, and between the inner sidewall and the … trench applicant refers.
The claimed limitation of "portions of the … trenches with … metal layers", as recited in claim 16, is unclear as to whether said limitation is in one-to-one, one-to-multiple or multiple-to-one relationship between the portion and the … trench, and between the portion and the … metal layer applicant refers.
The claimed limitations of "after the forming the first transistors: forming capping conductive films, each of which is formed on each of the first transistors within the first trenches”, as recited in claim 19, are unclear as to 1) how each capping conductive film can be formed on each of the first transistors since each individual one of the capping conductive films is a part of a corresponding one of the first transistors; 2) which element(s) within the first trenches applicant refers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8 and 10-12, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (2022/0077154) in view of Gopinath et al. (6,951,765) and Xu et al. (2004/0023453).
As for claims 1-3 and 5-8, Kim et al. show in Figs. 1, 7A-7H and related text a method of fabricating a semiconductor device, comprising:
providing a substrate 101 having defined thereon a plurality of active regions ACT, which are spaced apart from one another by at least one device isolation film 110 (Fig. 7A; [0059]);
forming a plurality of wordline trenches GT, all of which extend longitudinally in one direction and each of which extends across at least two of the active regions, each of the wordline trenches being formed both by removing a portion of each of the active regions that the wordline trench crosses and by removing portions of the device isolation film (Fig. 7B);
forming gate insulating films 120 along respective ones of inner sidewalls of the wordline trenches (Fig. 7C); and
forming wordlines 132, each of which fills a portion of respective ones of the wordline trenches, on respective ones of the gate insulating films (Fig. 7D),
wherein the forming the wordlines, comprises filling the portions of the wordline trenches with metal layers ([0027]).
Kim et al. do not disclose the filling the portions of each of the wordline trenches with a the metal layer using a supercritical fluid deposition (SFD) method, and a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers) (claim 1), placing the substrate with the wordline trenches formed therein within a reactor, supplying the metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal precursor penetrates into the wordline trenches, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the wordline trenches, and the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide are supercritical within the reactor (claim 2); the reduction gas is supercritical within the reactor (claim 3); the metal layer includes at least one of Ru, Mo, Cu, and TiN (claim 5); the reduction gas includes H2 or NH3 (claim 6); repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times (claim 7); rinsing an interior of the reactor with supercritical carbon dioxide after the repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times (claim 8).
Gophinath et al. teach in Figs. 1A-1C (or 1A, 1B, 1D), 2A-2E and related text:
As for claim 1, using a SFD method to fill a metal layer in a trench 207.
As for claim 2, placing the substrate with the trench formed therein within a reactor 201, supplying the metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal precursor penetrates into the trench 209/211, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the trench 213, and
the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide are supercritical within the reactor (Cols. 10-11; Fig. 2A).
As for claim 3, the reduction gas is supercritical within the reactor 211 (Fig. 2A).
As for claim 5, the metal layer includes at least one of Ru, Mo, Cu, and TiN (Col. 4, lines 15-32).
As for claim 6, the reduction gas includes H2 or NH3 (Col. 4, line 10).
As for claim 7, repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times (Fig. 2A; Col. 3, lines 30-39).
As for claim 8, rinsing an interior of the reactor with supercritical carbon dioxide 217 after the repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times (Fig. 2A; Col. 4, lines 11-14).
Gophinath et al. do no disclose a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers).
Xu et al. teach in related text a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers) ([0096]-[0129]; claims 40 and 43).
Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. are analogous art because they are directed to a method of forming a metal layer on a substrate and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Kim et al. with the specified feature(s) of Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include detail steps of using a SFD method to form a metal layer in a trench, as taught by Gophinath et al., and a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consisting of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y being natural numbers), as taught by Xu et al., in Kim et al.'s device, in order to improve uniformity, performance, reduce cost of the device, reduce heteroatom contamination, improve purity of the film and lower electrical resistivity.
As for claim 10, the combined device shows forming capping conductive films 134P/136P, each of which is formed on a respective one of the wordlines within the wordline trenches after the forming the wordlines (Kim: Fig. 7F; [0070]).
As for claim 11, the combined device shows forming capping insulating films 128, each of which is formed on a respective one of the capping conductive films within the wordline trenches after the forming the capping conductive films (Kim: Fig. 7H; [0074]).
As for claim 12, Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. disclosed substantially the entire claimed invention, as applied to claim 1 above, except the wordline trenches have a width of 10 nm to 20 nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the wordline trenches having a width of 10 nm to 20 nm, in order to optimize the performance of the device. Furthermore, it has been held that where then general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Furthermore, it has been held in that the applicant must show that a particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Note that the law is replete with cases in which when the mere difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some dimensional limitation or other variable within the claims, patentability cannot be found. The instant disclosure does not set forth evidence ascribing unexpected results due to the claimed dimensions. See Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 1984), which held that the dimensional limitations failed to point out a feature which performed and operated any differently from the prior art.
Claim(s) 9, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (2022/0077154), Gopinath et al. (6,951,765) and Xu et al. (2004/0023453) in view of Ko et al. (2022/0375760).
Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. disclosed substantially the entire claimed invention, as applied to claim 1 above, including the forming the wordlines, comprises forming at least one pre-metal layer, which completely fills all the wordline trenches, using the SFD method and removing portions of the pre-metal layer.
Kim et al. and Gophinath et al. do not disclose removing the portions of the pre-metal layer by using an atomic layer etching (ALE) method.
Ko et al. teach in Figs. 1-7 and related text removing portions of the pre-metal layer 20 by using an atomic layer etching (ALE) method.
Kim et al., Gophinath et al., Xu et al. and Ko et al. are analogous art because they are directed to a method of forming a metal layer on a substrate and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. with the specified feature(s) of Ko et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an atomic layer etching (ALE) method to remove portions of the pre-metal layer, as taught by Ko et al., in Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al.'s device, in order to produce smoother surface, better uniformity in high-aspect-ratio features, and improve the performance of the device.
Claim(s) 13-15, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (2022/0077154) in view of Gopinath et al. (6,951,765), Xu et al. (2004/0023453) and Ko et al. (2022/0375760).
As for claim 13, Kim et al. show in Figs. 1, 7A-7H and related text a method of fabricating a semiconductor device, comprising:
providing a substrate 101 having defined thereon a plurality of active regions ACT, which are spaced apart from one another by at least one device isolation film 110 (Fig. 7A; [0059]);
forming a plurality of wordline trenches GT, all of which extend longitudinally in one direction and each of which extends across at least two of the active regions, each of the wordline trenches being formed both by removing a portion of each of the active regions that the wordline trench acrosses and by removing portions of the device isolation film (Fig. 7B);
forming gate insulating films 120 along respective ones of inner sidewalls of the wordline trenches (Fig. 7C); and
forming wordlines 132, each of which fills a portion of respective ones of the wordline trenches, on respective ones of the gate insulating films (Fig. 7D; [0027]),
wherein
the forming the wordlines, comprises forming a least one pre-metal layer, which completely fills all the wordline trenches, and removing portions of the pre-metal layer.
Kim et al. do not disclose the forming the wordlines, comprises placing the substrate with the wordline trenches formed therein within a reactor, supplying a metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal precursor penetrates into the wordline trenches, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the wordline trenches, the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide are supercritical within the reactor, the metal of the metal precursor is at least one of Ru, Mo, Cu, and TiN, a ligand of the metal precursor consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers), the reduction gas is supercritical within the reactor, and the forming the wordlines, comprises forming the at least one pre-metal layer, which completely fills all the wordline trenches, by repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times, and removing the portions of the pre-metal layer using an atomic layer etching (ALE) method.
Gophinath et al. teach in Figs. 1A-1C (or 1A, 1B, 1D), 2A-2E and related text detail steps of forming metal layers in a trench by placing the substrate with the trench formed therein within a reactor, supplying a metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal precursor penetrates into the trench, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the trench, the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide are supercritical within the reactor, the metal of the metal precursor is at least one of Ru, Mo, Cu, and TiN, the reduction gas is supercritical within the reactor, and repeating both the supplying the metal precursor and the carbon dioxide into the reactor and the supplying the reduction gas into the reactor multiple times (Cols. 3-4, 10-14).
Gophinath et al. do no disclose a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers).
Xu et al. teach in related text a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers) ([0096]-[0129]; claims 40 and 43).
Ko et al. teach in Figs. 1-7 and related text removing the portions of the pre-metal layer 20 by using an atomic layer etching (ALE) method.
Kim et al., Gophinath et al., Xu et al. and Ko et al. are analogous art because they are directed to a method of forming a metal layer on a substrate and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Kim et al. with the specified feature(s) of Gophinath et al., Xu et al. and Ko et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a SFD method to form a metal layer in a trench, as taught by Gophinath et al., a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consisting of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y being natural numbers), as taught by Xu et al., and to use an atomic layer etching (ALE) method to remove the portions of the pre-metal layer, as taught by Ko et al., in Kim et al.'s device, in order to improve uniformity, reduce cost, reduce heteroatom contamination, improve purity of the film, lower electrical resistivity, produce smoother surface, better uniformity in high-aspect-ratio features, and improve the performance of the device.
As for claim 14, the combined device shows forming capping conductive films 134P/136P, each of which is formed on each of the wordlines within the wordline trenches after the forming the wordlines (Kim: Fig. 7F; [0070]).
As for claim 15, the combined device shows forming capping insulating films 128, each of which is formed on each of the capping conductive films within the wordline trenches after the forming the capping conductive films (Kim: Fig. 7H; [0074]).
Claim(s) 16, 17 and 19, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (2014/0327087) in view of Gopinath et al. (6,951,765) and Xu et al. (2004/0023453).
As for claims 16 and 17, Kim et al. show in Figs. 7, 9A-9C, 3A-3C, 4A4, 5A-5C, 6A-6C and related text a method of fabricating a semiconductor device, comprising:
providing a substrate 1, which includes a cell region CAR and a peripheral region PCR defined around the cell region (Fig. 7); and
forming first transistors CTR in the cell region and second transistors TR1 (and/or TR2) in the peripheral region, the first transistors and the second transistors being buried channel array transistors (BCATs),
wherein the forming the first transistors and the second transistors, comprises s forming first trenches T1 in the cell region and second trenches T2 in the peripheral region (Figs. 4A and 5B), forming first gate insulating films 9a along inner sidewalls of the first trenches and second gate insulating films 9b along inner sidewalls of the second trenches (Figs. 9A-9C), and filling portions of the first trenches with first metal layers 30 and portions of the second trenches with second metal layers 30 by forming the first metal layers on the first gate insulating films and the second metal layers on the second gate insulating films (Figs. 9A-9C)
Kim et al. al. do not disclose filling the portions of the first trenches with the first metal layers and the portions of the second trenches with the second metal layers by using a supercritical fluid deposition (SFD) method, and a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers) (claim 16) and placing the substrate within a reactor, supplying the metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal is precursor penetrates into the first trenches, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the first trenches (claim 17).
Gophinath et al. teach in Figs. 1A-1C (or 1A, 1B, 1D), 2A-2E and related text:
As for claim 16, using a SFD method to fill metal layers in a trench 207.
As for claim 17, placing the substrate within a reactor 201, supplying the metal precursor and carbon dioxide into the reactor such that the metal precursor penetrates into the trench 209/211, and supplying a reduction gas into the reactor such that a metal of the metal precursor is deposited within the trench 213.
Gophinath et al. do no disclose a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers).
Xu et al. teach in related text a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consists of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y are natural numbers) ([0096]-[0129]; claims 40 and 43).
Kim et al., Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. are analogous art because they are directed to a method of forming a metal layer on a substrate and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Kim et al. with the specified feature(s) of Gophinath et al. and Xu et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include detail steps of using a SFD method to form a metal layer in a trench, as taught by Gophinath et al., and a ligand of a metal precursor used in the SFD method consisting of one of Cx, Hy, and CxHy (where x and y being natural numbers), as taught by Xu et al., in Kim et al.'s device, in order to improve uniformity, performance, reduce cost, reduce heteroatom contamination, improve purity of the film and lower electrical resistivity.
As for claim 19, the combined device shows after the forming the first transistor:
forming capping conductive films 30, each of which is formed on each of the first transistors within the first trenches (Kim: Fig. 9A); and
forming capping insulating films 13a, each of which is formed on each of the capping conductive films within the first trenches (Fig. 9A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3,17 and 19 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 MEIYA LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1572. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM.
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, LYNNE GURLEY can be reached at (571)272-1670. 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.
/MEIYA LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights