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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I Species A (Claims 1-8, and 10) in the reply filed on 04/17/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 9, and 11-20 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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)(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.
Claims 1, and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WO2024121277A1 [hereinafter Neuter].
Regarding Claim 1:
Neuter teaches a radiation effects testing system (Fig. 1- irradiation station 100) comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
635
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a sample test housing (Fig. 1- target irradiation component 140) comprising a housing body and a sample chamber within the housing body (Fig. 1 and 14:11-17: a target irradiation component 140 for receiving target material, which can be “positioned directly in the target irradiation component 140 or in a local holder”); and
a neutron generator comprising a beam accelerator configured to generate an ion beam, a target chamber (Fig. 1- beam converter component 130), and a beamline (Fig. 1-beamlne 110) extending from the beam accelerator to the target chamber (Claim 3, Fig. 1 and 12: 6-8: “a beam line 110 for inducing an electron beam is provided…The beam line 110 may be or may be part of an accelerator,” and “a beam converter component (130) positioned at the end of the at least one beam line (110) for converting the deuterium beam of the at least one beam line (110) into neutrons”), wherein:
the sample test housing and target chamber are each housed in a bunker (Fig. 1 – irradiation pool 120) comprising a bunker floor and one or more bunker walls; water is positioned in the bunker forming a water pool (Fig. 1 and 12:23-25, 13:1-9: “irradiation pool 120 filled with a water-based substance,” and with sidewalls of at least 1m thickness); and
the sample test housing and the target chamber are positioned in the water pool (Fig. 1 and 14:3-4, 11-12: the irradiation pool 120 “typically is large enough to allow for submersion of a target station 101,” which includes the beam converter component 130 and the target irradiation component 14).
Regarding Claim 4:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches a sample loading system comprising a loading duct (Fig. 1- capillary tubing 162) comprising a loading end (tubing end connecting 160) and a chamber end (tubing end connecting 140), wherein:
the chamber end is coupled to a sample opening of the sample test housing, thereby providing a pathway from the loading end into the sample chamber; and the loading end of the loading duct is positioned above a water line of the water pool (Fig. 1 and 14:20-23: “a liquid target module in the target irradiation component 140 may be connected, e.g. by tubing such as capillary tubing, with a preparation stage, which may be positioned outside the irradiation pool 120. Fluid target, e.g. liquid target, may be loaded through the tubing. The preparation stage may be a hot cell 160”).
Regarding Claim 5:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 4. Neuter further teaches wherein the sample loading system further comprises an irradiation frame translatable along the loading duct and positionable within the sample chamber, wherein the irradiation frame is configured to hold one or more test samples (Claim 7 and 5:33-34, 6: 3-6, 14:13-17: the target material may be held in a capsule (“irradiation frame”), which is transferred between the hot cell 160 and the target irradiation component 140 via the passage of the capillary tubing 162).
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.
Claims 2-3 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of KR20100073688A [hereinafter Yung].
PNG
media_image2.png
721
775
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the target chamber is positioned such that the sample test housing surrounds the target chamber. Yung teaches wherein the target chamber is positioned such that the sample test housing surrounds the target chamber (annotated Fig. 4 above and para. [0051]: “the sample holder 212 has a shape surrounding the neutron generator 211 and has a radial symmetry shape around the neutron generator 211”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to configure Neuter’s irradiation component/sample test housing to surround the neutron generating target/converter, as taught by Yung, to position the test sample as close as possible to the neutron generating region and thereby increase the amount of neutron radiation incident on the sample.
Regarding Claim 3:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the sample test housing further comprises a source receiving slot and the target chamber is positioned in the source receiving slot of the sample test housing such that the sample test housing surrounds the target chamber. Yung teaches wherein the sample test housing further comprises a source receiving slot and the target chamber is positioned in the source receiving slot of the sample test housing such that the sample test housing surrounds the target chamber (as shown in Fig. 4, the annular sample holder 212 has a central receiving opening/bore into which the tubular neutron generator 211 extends).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide Neuter’s sample test housing with a central source receiving opening, as taught by Yung, to accommodate the neutron-generating target within the sample housing and permit the sample region to surround and remain closely positioned to the neutron-generating region.
Regarding Claim 24:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches a sample loading system, wherein:
the housing body is a first housing body and the sample chamber is a first sample chamber, the sample test housing further comprises a first sample opening in the first housing body opening to the first sample chamber (Fig. 2 – irradiation pool 120 and the irradiation component 130, as discussed in claim 1);
the sample test housing further comprises a second housing body, a second sample chamber within the second housing body, and a second sample opening in the second housing body opening to the second sample chamber (Fig. 2 and 15:8-19: the second irradiation pool 1020, with the second beam converter component 1020 and second target irradiation component 1040 merged inside the pool 1020)
the sample loading system comprises
a first loading duct (Fig. 2 – tubing supplies sample to 140) comprising a chamber end coupled to the first sample opening and a loading end (as discussed in claim 4), and
a second loading duct (Fig. 2- tubing supplies sample to 1040) comprising a chamber end coupled to the second sample opening and a loading end.
However, Neuter does not expressly teach that the first housing body is positioned adjacent the second housing body such that the first housing body and the second housing body collectively surround the target chamber. As discussed in claim 2, Yung teaches wherein the target chamber is positioned such that the sample test housing surrounds the target chamber. Since Neuter establishes that its system may include two target irradiation components, each associated with a neutron-generating target station and remotely supplied from outside the pool, modify Neuter with Yung would position Neuter’s first and second target irradiation components 140 and 1040 adjacent to one another on different sides of a common neutron generating target chamber, consistent with Yung’s surrounding arrangement. The two components would thereby collectively surround the target chamber while retaining their respective loading tubes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to position Neuter’s first and second target irradiation components adjacent to one another around a common neutron generating target chamber, as taught by Yung, to position the samples closer to the neutron generating location and increase the proportion of generated neutrons incident upon the samples, thereby improving irradiation efficiency while permitting the samples to be loaded independently through their respective transfer tubes.
Claims 6 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of Chow, M.-C. (1968). Recombination statistics for the neutron-induced base current component. Scholars” Mine. [hereinafter Chow].
Regarding Claim 6:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 5. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein a neutron absorption liner is positioned inside the irradiation frame. Chow teaches, wherein a neutron absorption liner is positioned inside the irradiation frame (Page 115-D4 irradiation problems: “The transistors used in this neutron radiation effects study were irradiated in a double-walled aluminum sample holder having the inner space filled with boron carbide. The boron carbide shield is needed to allow only fast neutrons(E > 10keV) to bombard the devices”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the irradiation frame/capsula of Neuter with the neutron-absorbing liner taught by Chow in order to reduce unwanted low-energy neutron irradiation of the test sample and thereby provide better control of the neutron spectrum incident on the sample.
Regarding Claim 26:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches the system further comprising a sample loading system comprising a loading duct and an irradiation frame positionable within the sample chamber, as previously discussed in claims 1, 4-5. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein a neutron absorption liner is positioned inside the irradiation frame and the neutron absorption liner comprises a boron carbide material or borated polyethylene, and wherein the neutron absorption liner preferentially absorbs thermal neutrons with minimal absorption of DT fusion neutrons. Chow teaches wherein a neutron absorption liner is positioned inside the irradiation frame and the neutron absorption liner comprises a boron carbide material or borated polyethylene, and wherein the neutron absorption liner preferentially absorbs thermal neutrons with minimal absorption of DT fusion neutrons (as discussed in claim 6, Chow teaches the sample holder with inner space filled with boron carbide, and the boron carbide shield has a high capture cross-section for slow neutrons (E<10KeV) and is provided so that fast neutrons (E>10KeV) bombard the test devices. Thus, Chow’s boron-carbide material preferentially absorbs thermal neutrons while permitting substantially higher-energy neutrons, including DT-energy neutrons, to reach the test devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to use Chow’s boron-carbide neutron absorbing material as the liner of Neuter because Chow teaches that boron carbide preferentially captures slow neutrons while permitting fast neutrons to reach the irradiation device, thereby suppressing unwanted thermal neutron background while preserving the desired high-energy neutron irradiation.
Claims 7, and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of US 3637096 A[hereinafter Crate].
Regarding Claim 7:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 5. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein a rail system is positioned in the loading duct and the irradiation frame is configured to travel along the rail system. Crate teaches wherein a rail system is positioned in the loading duct and the irradiation frame is configured to travel along the rail system (Figs. 1-2: 59-61, 3:1-12: Crate teaches a rail system positioned in a loading duct, where the load-supporting rails 33 pass through transfer tube 15 (“loading duct”), and fuel carrier 20 (“irradiation frame”) is carried by carriage 25 along rails 33 through transfer tube 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the loading duct of Neuter with Crate’s rail system so that the irradiation frame/capsule can be supported and guided along a defined path through the loading duct, thereby facilitating reliable insertion and removal of the frame from the sample chamber.
Regarding Claim 27:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. However, Neuter does not expressly teach the additional limitations recited in claim 27. Crate teaches a sample loading system comprising a loading duct and a rail system positioned in the loading duct, as previously discussed in claim 7.
Crate further teaches the rail system comprising:
a railway coupled to the loading duct and extending from a rail loading end to a rail chamber end, the rail chamber end terminating within the sample chamber (Figs. 1-2: rails 33 extending longitudinally through transfer tube 15 from one side to the other); and
a rail mount engageable with the railway and configured to facilitate movement of the rail mount along the railway (Figs. 1-2 and 3:13-22: carriage 25 (rail mount”), whose wheels 32 rest on/engage rail 33, and motor 34 and transmission 35 drive wheels 32 so carriage 25 translates along rails 33),
wherein an irradiation frame is couplable to the rail mount such that the irradiation frame is transportable within the loading duct to and from the sample chamber (fuel carrier 20 is pivotally mounted to carriage 25 through trunnion 24, such that the carriage 25 carries fuel carrier 20/20A through transfer tube 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to use Crate’s railway and movable carriage arrangement, with the irradiation frame coupled to the carriage, in order to provide controlled and repeatable transport of the irradiation frame through the loading duct and into and out of the sample chamber while maintaining alignment of the frame during movement.
Regarding Claim 28:
Neuter in view of Crate teaches the system of claim 27. Crate further teaches wherein the rail loading end of the railway comprises an extended loading segment that extends outward from a loading end of the loading duct, the extended loading segment providing a location external to the loading duct for coupling and uncoupling the irradiation frame to the rail mount (as shown in Figs. 1-2, the rails 33 extend beyond transfer tube 15, so there is an exposed rail segment outside the duct, providing an accessible loading location at which and fuel carrier 20 can be coupled and uncoupled from carriage 25).
As such in the combined system, it would have been obvious to couple a mounting end of the extended rail segment to a wall of irradiation pool 120 of Neuter in order to support and stabilize the rail system and maintain alignment of the railway with the loading duct during movement of the irradiation frame, as claimed.
Claims 8 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of JP2003279500A [hereinafter Anritsu].
Regarding Claim 8:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 4. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the sample loading system further comprises a duct plug removably positionable in the loading end of the loading duct and when the duct plug is positioned in the loading end of the loading duct, the duct plug blocks a neutron line of sight between the target chamber and the loading end of the loading duct. Anritsu teaches wherein a duct plug removably positionable in the loading end of the loading duct (Fig. 1 and paras. [0012, 0016, 0021]: detachable shielding curtain unit 12 (“duct plug”), removably inserted into the radiation transport passage from inlet 3 of the housing 2, to shield the entrance/exit against radiation leakage).
As such, positioning a duct plug as taught by Anritsu to the loading end of the loading duct of Neuter will interrupt the direct neutron path toward that opening, as claimed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the loading end of Neuter with the removable radiation shield unit of Anritsu to reduce radiation leakage through the otherwise open loading passage while retaining a removable assembly that permits access to and use of the loading passage.
Regarding Claim 29:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches a sample loading system comprising a loading duct having a loading end. However, Neuter does not expressly teach the remaining limitations as recited in claim 29. Anritsu teaches a duct plug removably positionable in the loading end of the loading duct, as discussed in claim 8. Anritsu further teaches the duct plug comprising a plug basket comprising a perimeter lip configured to engage with the loading end of the loading duct (Fig. 1 and para. [0020]: the curtain unit 12 includes a supporting base 13 (“plug basket”) with L-shaped guide 14 having inward-facing flanges (“perimeter lip”), which are carried by base 13 and engage corresponding rails 15 on the housing so that the complete unit can be slid into its installed position); and
one or more plug slats positioned in the plug basket, the one or more plug slats each comprising a radiation shielding material (Fig. 1 and paras. [0006 and 0020]: shielding curtains 11 (“plug slats”) supported by common base 13, the shielding curtains are sheet-like member made of shielding materials),
wherein the one or more plug slats are laterally spaced to provide openings for wiring connected to one or more test samples to exit the loading duct (Fig. 1 and para. [0020]: the shielding curtains 11 are attached to common base 13 “at a predetermined interval,” the predetermined spaces between the shielding curtains provide spaces capable of accommodating wiring or alike).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the loading end of Neuter with Anritsu’s detachable unit carrying spaced radiation-shielding members in order to reduce radiation leakage through the loading passage while maintaining openings between the shielding members for components that must pass through the loading passage.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of CN106710661A [hereinafter Wu]
Regarding Claim 10:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches the ion beam comprises a deuterium beam (15: 3: the system may use a deuterium beam). However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the neutron generator further comprises a low-pressure chamber positioned along the beamline between the beam accelerator and the target chamber; the target chamber houses tritium. Wu teaches wherein the neutron generator further comprises
a low-pressure chamber positioned along the beamline between the beam accelerator and the target chamber (Fig. 1 and para. [0042]: the vacuum differential system 2 (includes primary and secondary differential chambers 22 and 24), connecting the accelerator interface 5 (“beam accelerator”) and reaction gas chamber 1 (“target chamber”). The accelerator end operates around 10-5 Pa, while reaction gas chamber 1 is around 103 Pa);
the target chamber houses tritium (para. [0045]: reaction chamber 1 contains tritium gas or deuterium gas, with the deuterium beam reacting with the tritium to generate high-energy fusion neutrons); and
the ion beam comprises a deuterium beam (para. [0045]: the accelerator generates deuterium beam 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to modify the neutron generator of Neuter according to Wu to provide lower pressure differential chamber between the accelerator and the target chamber, and to use a deuterium beam with a tritium containing target chamber, to maintain the low-pressure environment required for stable ion beam transport while permitting a higher-pressure tritium reaction region for efficient D-T neutron generation.
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of CN112188718A [hereinafter Wang].
Regarding Claim 21:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. However, Neuter does not expressly teach additional limitations as recited in claim 21. Wang teaches a target support structure (Fig. 1: first support frame 1 for accelerator equipment) coupled to the sample test housing,
wherein the target support structure comprises a base end (Fig. 1- bottom frame 15) opposite an entry end (Fig. 1- upper end includes plate 6), a plurality of support legs (Fig. 1- upright support member 16,17) , and an intermediate shelf portion positioned between the base end and the entry end, and wherein the base end is coupled to the bunker floor (Fig. 1: intermediate support assembly 18, including mounting plate 4 and transverse reinforcing members 21-23, positioned between bottom frame 15 and upper end).
Since Wang’s bottom frame 15 is the lowermost structural base of the support frame 1, when Wang’s support structure is incorporated into Neuter’s bunker, bottom frame 15 would be secured to the bunker floor to support and stabilize the supported housing/beam apparatus, as claimed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the sample test housing of Neuter with the rigid support frame arrangement of Wang, including the floor-supported base, support legs, and an intermediate support shelf, to securely support the sample test housing and maintain its position and alignment relative to the beamline and target chamber.
Regarding Claim 22:
Neuter in view of Wang teaches the system of claim 21. Neuter further teaches the target chamber is positioned proximate the sample test housing (the converter/target chamber 130 positioned immediately adjacent target irradiation component/sample test housing 140). Wang further teaches wherein the target support structure further comprises
an entry plate (Fig. 1- adjusting plate 6) positioned at the entry end, the entry plate coupled to the plurality of support legs (Fig. 1: plate 6 is connected through adjusting screws 5 to mounting plate 4, which is fixed to reinforcing members 21-23 of first support frame 1, which in turn are connected to uprights 16 and 17) and
comprising a beamline opening, wherein a portion of the beamline extends through the beamline opening (Fig. 1 and para. [0014] : plate 6 has a central opening so that the accelerating tube 3 “penetrates the mounting plate and the adjusting plate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to further provide the support structure of modified Neuter/Wang with Wang’s entry plate having an opening through which the beamline extends in order to support and maintain alignment of the beamline relative to the target chamber and sample test housing.
Regarding Claim 23:
Neuter in view of Wang teaches the system of claim 21. Wang further teaches wherein the intermediate shelf portion comprises
a first lateral support coupled to the sample test housing (Fig.8 – transverse reinforcing members 21-23/mounting plate 4 extending laterally between uprights 16/17); and
a second lateral support (Fig. 8- reinforcement rod 48) coupled to a loading duct (Fig.8- elongated waveguide 45) of a sample loading system using one or more linking arms (Fig. 8- fastening support assembly 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to further provide sperate lateral supports for the sample testing housing and loading duct, as taught by Wang, to independently support and stabilize the housing and the elongate duct while maintaining their relative positioning within the common support structure.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of US20200096721A1 [hereinafter Fisher]
Regarding Claim 25:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches a sample loading system comprising a loading duct and an irradiation frame translatable along the loading duct and positionable within the sample chamber. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the irradiation frame comprises one or more optical breadboards for mounting electronics, and wherein openings in the one or more optical breadboards provide a pathway for wiring of test samples to exit the irradiation frame.
Fisher teaches an optical breadboard having a mounting surface with a plurality of apertures for securing components. Fisher explains that optical breadboards are used to “removably secure a plurality of optical and mechanical components” (Fig.1 and para. [0002]).
Specially, Fisher teaches wherein the irradiation frame comprises one or more optical breadboards for mounting electronics, and wherein openings in the one or more optical breadboards provide a pathway for wiring of test samples to exit the irradiation frame (Fig.1 and paras. [0036, 0041]: the optical breadboard structure 10/40 whose breadboard mounting surface and fastening apertures can be used to secure apparatuses and components. Fisher’s elongated passages 56, 57, which “extend the length of fasten layer 40” and are expressly “available for use as either connecting wire conduits”; alternatively, Fisher’s T-shaped voids 75-77 have a lower portion expressly forming a “media or wiring passage”).
As such, when Fisher’s breadboard is incorporated into Neuter’s irradiation frame, the wire conduit passage would route wiring from electronics mounted on the breadboard through the breadboard and outward from the irradiation frame for connection outside the frame, as claimed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to provide the irradiation frame of Neuter with Fisher’s optical breadboard and associated wiring passages to securely mount electronic test components in a defined arrangement while providing organized routing of electrical wiring from the mounted components out of the irradiation frame.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuter in view of US6697446B2 [hereinafter Kang]
Regarding Claim 30:
Neuter teaches the system of claim 1. Neuter further teaches a sample loading system comprising a loading duct coupled to a sample opening of the sample test housing. However, Neuter does not expressly teach wherein the loading duct provides a pathway for wiring connected to a test sample comprising an electronic component to reach above a water line of the water pool, allowing the test sample to be powered and operational during testing.
Kang teaches a specimen capsule submerged in a reactor pool. Specially, Kang teaches wherein the loading duct provides a pathway for wiring connected to a test sample comprising an electronic component to reach above a water line of the water pool, allowing the test sample to be powered and operational during testing (Figs. 1and 4a; 6:60-65, 2:31-33, 39-4, 11:5-9, 14-19 : protection tube 60/guide tube 70 carrying electrical control wires from the submerged irradiation capsule to equipment outside the reactor pool. The control wires include heater control wires, which connect heaters 27 to control system 90, and the control system controls heater output power during the material irradiation test).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art, before the effective time of filing, to route electrical wiring from a submerged test sample through Neuter’s loading passage to a location above/outside the water pool, as taught by Kang, to maintain protected electrical connections to the test sample and permit electrical operations and monitoring of the sample during irradiation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:00.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JING WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights