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 .
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.
Claims 10-11 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.
Claim 10 recites “…the Ga2O3 epilayer surface further comprises an etch stop layer”. It is unclear because the term “comprises” indicates the etch stop layer is included in the recited “the Ga2O3 epilayer surface”, i.e., that the etch stop layer forms a constituent portion of the epilayer. However, as shown in the drawings, the etch stop layer is depicted as a separate layer over the Ha2O3 epilayer, rather than being included within the Ga2O3 epilayer itself. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpreted as “an etch stop layer disposed on the Ga2O3 epilayer surface”.
Claim 11 inherits the indefiniteness of claim 10 which it depends. Thus, claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim 19 recites the limitation "… the etch stop layer…" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 19 depends from claim 12, and there is no recitation “a etch stop layer” in claim 12. For the purpose of examination, claim 19 is interpreted as dependent from claim 18 to provide sufficient antecedent basis for “the etch stop layer”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LV (US 20210043778 A1) in view of Okochi (JP 2010208925 A).
Re: Independent Claim 1, LV discloses a method comprising:
patterning a Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface according to a desired structure (LV teaches, in ¶¶ [0042]- [0047], Step S102: deposit a mask layer 3′ on the N− low-concentration Ga₂O₃ epitaxial layer; and step 103: remove the part, outside the corresponding area of the anode metal layer, of the mask layer by adopting a dry etching method or a wet etching method).
LV is silent regarding
placing the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface into a vacuum environment;
heating the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface in the vacuum environment to a temperature; and
supplying a Ga flux to the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface for an amount of time to etch the desired structure into the Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface.
However, Okochi teaches:
placing the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface into a vacuum environment (Okochi teaches, in its translated copy - Second embodiment description, gallium oxide (Ga₂O₃) is used as the material of the thin film 43, and this sample is introduced again into a vacuum chamber equipped with a molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) device through a vacuum tunnel in an ultra-high vacuum atmosphere);
heating the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface in the vacuum environment to a temperature (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, the Ga₂O₃ in contact with the Ga is modified into a Ga2O that is easily desorbed by heat treatment (i.e., heated to a desired temperature) in the MBE environment; and
supplying a Ga flux to the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, supplying/depositing Ga in an ultra-high vacuum atmosphere (e.g., Ga is deposited for 5 atomic layers to form Ga metal droplets) for an amount of time to etch the desired structure into the Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface (Ga₂O₃ thin film is chemically converted according to Ga₂O₃ + 4Ga [Wingdings font/0xE0]3Ga2O and is locally removed (etched) by the heat treatment, thereby etching into the Ga₂O₃ surface over time).
Both LV and Okochi teach semiconductor devices, hence analogous art. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV to further place the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface into a vacuum environment, heat the patterned Ga₂O₃ epilayer in the vacuum environment, and etch the desired structure into the Ga₂O₃ epilayer surface by supplying a Ga flux for an amount of time, as taught by Okochi, in order to enable in-vacuum processing of Ga₂O₃ (i.e., continuous processing without exposing to the ambient atmosphere), which improves process integration and surface/film quality during fabrication (Okochi, Second embodiment description).
Re: Claim 2, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV further discloses,
wherein patterning the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises patterning the epilayer surface using SiO2 (LV teaches, in ¶¶ [0015] – [0016], “…depositing a mask layer on the N− low-concentration Ga2O3 epitaxial layer…” and “…a material of the mask layer is SiO2…”).
Re: Claim 3, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV further discloses,
wherein patterning the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises patterning the epilayer surface (LV teaches, in ¶ [0043] –[0047], Step S102: “deposit a mask layer 3′ on the N− low-concentration Ga.sub.2O.sub.3 epitaxial layer…”; Step S103: “remove the part… mask layer…”) using optical lithography or plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (Step S102: “…the material of the mask layer is SiO2which is formed by PECVD…” and also step S103: “…a photoresist layer can be coated on the corresponding area… and then the mask layer is removed…”).
Re: Claim 4, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Okochi further discloses,
wherein the etching the Ga2O3 epilayer surface increases a concentration of dopants in the Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Okochi teaches, in its translated copy- Second embodiment description, etching/removing Ga2O3 by supplying GA flux in a vacuum environment such that Ga2O3 is chemically modified and locally removed according to the reaction Ga₂O₃ + 4Ga [Wingdings font/0xE0]3Ga2O, wherein the Ga2O3 is easily desorbed by heat treatment and the Ga2O3 thin film is locally removed. Further, Okochi’s chemical reduction/removal of Ga2O3 corresponds to an oxygen-deficient modification of the Ga2O3 surface region during the etching process (i.e., oxygen is removed from Ga2O3 as it is converted into Ga2O and desorbed), which would correspondingly increase the concentration of donor-type defect dopants (e.g., oxygen-vacancy related dopants) at/near the etched Ga2O3 epilayer surface.
Re: Claim 5, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Okochi further discloses,
wherein the vacuum environment comprises a molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) chamber (Okochi teaches, in its translated copy Second embodiment description, placing the Ga2O3 surface into a vacuum chamber comprising MBE device through a vacuum tunnel).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV to further utilize a vacuum environment comprising an MBE chamber, as taught by Okochi, on order to enable continuous processing in a highly controlled vacuum environment without exposing the sample to the atmosphere, which improves process integration and surface/film quality during fabrication (Okochi, Second embodiment description).
Re: Independent Claim 12, LV discloses a system comprising:
a patterning device, wherein the patterning device is adapted to pattern a Ga2O3 epilayer surface according to a desired structure (LV teaches, in ¶ [0015], an embodiment for depositing a mask layer on the N− low-concentration Ga₂O₃ epitaxial layer; and then selectively removing portions of the mask layer to define where processing occurs. LV further teaches removing the part of the mask layer outside a corresponding area (i.e., leaving the mask in the “desired” region) to obtain a sample having a defined patterned area. LV further teaches that the mask layer may be removed by dry etching or wet etching, which is consistent with implementing a pattern. Accordingly, LV teaches a patterning device (mask layer and associated lithography/formation/removal) adapted to pattern a Ga2O3 epilayer surface).
LV is silent regarding,
a vacuum environment;
a gallium source;
wherein the vacuum environment is adapted to receive the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface; and heat the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface to a desired temperature; and wherein the gallium source is adapted to supply a Ga flux to the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface for an amount of time to etch the Ga2O3 epilayer surface.
However, Okochi teaches
a vacuum environment (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, introducing as substrate/sample into a vacuum chamber equipped with an MBE apparatus, and transferring the sample between vacuum chambers via a vacuum tunnel, i.e., system comprising vacuum environment)
a gallium source (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, depositing Ga in an ultra-high vacuum atmosphere to form Ga metal droplets, thus teaches a gallium source); and
wherein the vacuum environment is adapted to receive the Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, gallium oxide (Ga₂O₃) is used as the material of the thin film 43, and this sample is introduced again into a vacuum chamber equipped with a molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) device through a vacuum tunnel in an ultra-high vacuum atmosphere, thus the vacuum environment is adapted to receive the Ga2O3); and
heat the Ga2O3 epilayer surface to a desired temperature (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, the Ga₂O₃ in contact with the Ga is modified into a Ga2O that is easily desorbed by heat treatment (i.e., heated to a desired temperature) in the MBE environment); and
wherein the gallium source is adapted to supply a Ga flux to the Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, supplying/depositing Ga in an ultra-high vacuum atmosphere (e.g., Ga is deposited for 5 atomic layers to form Ga metal droplets) for an amount of time to etch the Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Ga₂O₃ thin film is chemically converted according to Ga₂O₃ + 4Ga [Wingdings font/0xE0]3Ga2O and is locally removed (etched) by the heat treatment, thereby etching into the Ga₂O₃ surface over time).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of LV and Okochi to arrive at the claimed system, such that the vacuum environment of Okochi is adapted to receive the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface formed by LV, and the gallium source supplies Ga flux to etch the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface, because both references are directed to processing Ga2O3 semiconductor layers, and the combination merely applies Okochi’s known vacuum Ga-assisted etching process to a pre-patterned Ga2O3 epilayer.
Re: Claim 13, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV further discloses,
wherein the patterning device is adapted to pattern the Ga2O3 epilayer using SiO2 (LV teaches, in ¶¶ [0015] – [0016], the mask layer used for patterning device may be SiO2, thereby teaching that the patterning device is adapted to pattern the Ga2O3 epilayer using SiO2).
Re: Claim 14, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV further discloses,
wherein the patterning device is adapted to pattern the Ga2O3 epilayer using optical lithography (LV teaches, in ¶ [0047], “a photoresist layer can be coated on the corresponding area… and then the mask layer is removed…”, hence teaching the patterning device is adapted to pattern the Ga2O3 epilayer using optical lithography).
Re: Claim 15, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV further discloses,
wherein the vacuum environment comprises a molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) chamber (Okochi teaches, in Second embodiment description, placing the Ga2O3 surface into a vacuum chamber comprising MBE device through a vacuum tunnel).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV to further utilize a vacuum environment comprising an MBE chamber, as taught by Okochi, on order to enable continuous processing in a highly controlled vacuum environment without exposing the sample to the atmosphere, which improves process integration and surface/film quality during fabrication (Okochi, Second embodiment description).
Claim(s) 6-7, 9, 17, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LV (US 20210043778 A1) in view of Okochi (JP 2010208925 A) further in view of Sasaki (US 20140331919 A1).
Re: Claim 6, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
further comprising rotating the patterned Ga2O3 surface while supplying the Ga flux to the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface.
However, Sasaki teaches further comprising rotating the patterned Ga2O3 surface while supplying the Ga flux to the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Sasaki teaches, in ¶ [0038] and Fig. 2, rotating the substrate holder 11 while Ga is evaporated and are radiated as a molecular beam onto the surface of the Ga2O3 based crystal substrate 2 (i.e., rotation during Ga delivery/flux exposure)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV (including Okochi’s Ga-flux vacuum processing/ etching mechanism) to rotate the patterned Ga2O3 surface while supplying the Ga flux, as taught by Sasaki, in order to promote more uniform exposure of the patterned surface to the Ga flux during processing, thereby improving process uniformity and device fabrication quality (Sasaki, ¶ [0004]).
Re: Claim 7, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
further comprising rotating the patterned Ga2O3 surface about an angle while supplying the Ga flux to the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface.
However, Sasaki teaches
further comprising rotating the patterned Ga2O3 surface about an angle while supplying the Ga flux to the patterned Ga2O3 epilayer surface (Sasaki teaches, in ¶ [0033], “…the substrate holder can be rotated…”, and further teaches, in ¶ [0038], “… while rotating the substrate holder so that Ga… evaporated and are radiated as molecular beam onto the surface of the Ga2O3 based crystal substrate…”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify LV to rotate the patterned Ga2O3 surface about an angle while supplying the Ga flux, as taught by Sasaki, in order to provide more uniform exposure of the patterned surface to the Ga flux during processing, thereby improving process uniformity and device quality (Sasaki, ¶ [0004]).
Re: Claim 9, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises β-Ga2O3 surface.
However, Sasaki teaches
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises β-Ga2O3 surface (Sasaki teaches, in ¶ [0040], the β-Ga2O3 based crystal is epitaxially grown on the Ga2O3 based crystal substrate).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV to further include a β-Ga2O3 surface as taught by Sasaki, in order to form the most stable crystalline form.
Re: Claim 17, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises β-Ga2O3 surface.
However, Sasaki teaches
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface comprises β-Ga2O3 surface (Sasaki teaches, in ¶ [0040], the β-Ga2O3 based crystal is epitaxially grown on the Ga2O3 based crystal substrate).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV to further include a β-Ga2O3 surface as taught by Sasaki, in order to form the most stable crystalline form.
Re: Claim 20, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the vacuum environment is further adapted to rotate the Ga2O3 epilayer surface while Ga flux is applied.
However, Sasaki teaches wherein the vacuum environment is further adapted to rotate the Ga2O3 epilayer surface while Ga flux is applied (Sasaki, in ¶ [0038] and Fig. 2, teaches rotating the substrate holder while Ga is evaporated and are radiated as a molecular beam onto the surface of the Ga2O3 based crystal substrate (i.e., rotation during Ga delivery/flux exposure)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV (including Okochi’s Ga-flux vacuum processing/ etching mechanism) to adapt the vacuum environment to rotate the patterned Ga2O3 surface while supplying the Ga flux, as taught by Sasaki, in order to promote more uniform exposure of the patterned surface to the Ga flux during processing, thereby improving process uniformity and device fabrication quality (Sasaki, ¶ [0004]).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LV (US 20210043778 A1) in view of Okochi (JP 2010208925 A) further in view of Ku (US 20080180209 A1).
Re: Claim 8, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the desired structure comprises one or more vertical sidewalls, one or more undercut structures, and one or more fins.
Ku further teaches
wherein the desired structure comprises one or more vertical sidewalls, one or more undercut structures, and one or more fins (Ku teaches, in ¶¶ [0026] – [0027], patterning/etching gallium oxide film and leaves behind a patterned gallium oxide structure such as one or more lines. Accordingly, such line-shaped protrusions/ridges correspond to “fins”, and the formation of etched line features necessarily defines sidewall surfaces that extend from the top surface of the film toward the underlying substrate. Further, a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the method of LV (as modified by Okochi) so that the desired structure being etched into the Ga2O3 epilayer includes fin/line features and undercut profiles as taught by Ku, in order to improve/ facilitate deposition on the patterned structure (Ku, ¶ [0027).
Re: Claim 16, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the desired structure comprises one or more vertical sidewalls, one or more undercut structures, and one or more fins.
Ku further teaches
wherein the desired structure comprises one or more vertical sidewalls, one or more undercut structures, and one or more fins (Ku teaches, in ¶¶ [0026] – [0027], patterning/etching gallium oxide film and leaves behind a patterned gallium oxide structure such as one or more lines. Accordingly, such line-shaped protrusions/ridges correspond to “fins”, and the formation of etched line features necessarily defines sidewall surfaces that extend from the top surface of the film toward the underlying substrate. Further, a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the system of LV (as modified by Okochi) so that the desired structure being etched into the Ga2O3 epilayer includes fin/line features and undercut profiles as taught by Ku, in order to improve/ facilitate deposition on the patterned structure (Ku, ¶ [0027).
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LV (US 20210043778 A1) in view of Okochi (JP 2010208925 A) further in view of Heo (US 20230079059 A1).
Re: Claim 10, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface further comprises an etch stop layer.
However, Heo teaches, in ¶¶ [0176] – [0182], providing an etch stop layer in an etching-based fabrication flow, including “forming an etch stop layer” and then performing an etch to a predetermined depth where the etch stop layer functions to stop/define the etch).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV in view of Okochi to further include an etch stop layer associated with the Ga2O3 epilayer surface, as taught by Heo, because providing an etch stop layer is a known, predictable way to improve etch depth control and reduce over-etch/processing variability when etching semiconductor-related structure (Heo, ¶ [0182]).
Re: Claim 18, LV and Okochi disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV and Okochi are silent regarding,
wherein the Ga2O3 epilayer surface further comprises an etch stop layer.
However, Heo teaches, in ¶¶ [0176] – [0182], providing an etch stop layer in an etching-based fabrication flow, including “forming an etch stop layer” and then performing an etch to a predetermined depth where the etch stop layer functions to stop/define the etch).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV in view of Okochi to further include an etch stop layer associated with the Ga2O3 epilayer surface, as taught by Heo, because providing an etch stop layer is a known, predictable way to improve etch depth control and reduce over-etch/processing variability when etching semiconductor-related structure (Heo, ¶ [0182]).
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LV (US 20210043778 A1) in view of Okochi (JP 2010208925 A) further in view of Heo (US 20230079059 A1) and further in view of Zhao (US 20210388526 A1).
Re: Claim 11, LV, Okochi and Heo disclose all the limitations of claim 10 on which this claim depends.
LV, Okochi and Heo are silent regarding,
wherein the etch stop layer comprises β-(AlxGa1-x)2O3.
However, Zhoa teaches wherein the etch stop layer comprises β-(AlxGa1-x)2O3 (Zhoa teaches, in ¶ [0003], β-Ga2O3 is known to have very wide bandgap energy (˜4.8 eV), and its higher thermal/chemical stability. Zhoa further teaches, in ¶ [0004], Energy bandgap engineering by alloying β-Ga2O3 with Al2O3 can expand the accessible bandgap of AlGaO alloy up to 8.8 eV.; thus, higher thermal/chemical stability is achieved with AlGaO alloy which makes (AlxGa1-x)2O3 a predictable great choice to be used as a stop etch layer in semiconductor fabrication).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV in view of Okochi to further include an etch stop layer associated with the Ga2O3 epilayer surface as taught by Heo, and to use (AlxGa1-x)2O3 as the etch stop layer as taught by Zhoa, in order to achieve better control over the etch process.
Re: Claim 19, LV, Okochi and Heo disclose all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends.
LV, Okochi and Heo are silent regarding,
wherein the etch stop layer comprises β-(AlxGa1-x)2O3.
However, Zhoa teaches wherein the etch stop layer comprises β-(AlxGa1-x)2O3 (Zhoa teaches, in ¶ [0003], β-Ga2O3 is known to have very wide bandgap energy (˜4.8 eV), and its higher thermal/chemical stability. Zhoa further teaches, in ¶ [0004], Energy bandgap engineering by alloying β-Ga2O3 with Al2O3 can expand the accessible bandgap of AlGaO alloy up to 8.8 eV.; thus, higher thermal/chemical stability is achieved with AlGaO alloy which makes (AlxGa1-x)2O3 a predictable great choice to be used as a stop etch layer in semiconductor fabrication).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of LV in view of Okochi to further include an etch stop layer associated with the Ga2O3 epilayer surface as taught by Heo, and to use (AlxGa1-x)2O3 as the etch stop layer as taught by Zhoa, in order to achieve better control over the etch process.
Prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to current application disclosure.
Shinriki (US 20140120678 A1) and Xue (US 9852902 B2) disclose method of material deposition and selective epitaxy of highly doped semiconductor material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-4149. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:30am-7:30pm.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571) 272-2339. 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.
/BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898