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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: RARE EARTH ELEMENT-BASED WAVELENGTH CONVERTER FOR LUMINESCENCE THERMOMETRY.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/7/2024 and 11/7/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claims Status
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and being examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
A. Claim 1 defines a phosphor with the formula where 0<x≤1, requiring the presence of lanthanum (La). However, claims 3 and 5 include formulas and respectively, which lack La (x = 0). This contradicts the requirement of claim 1 that X > 0, rendering claims 3 and 5 inconsistent with claim 1. Appropriate correction is required such as amending and/or canceling the limitation GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3:Cr of claim 3 and the limitation Gd0.99 Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 of claim 5.
B. The formula GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3 in claim 3 is ambiguous. The notation suggests a composite or mixture of a Gd-based perovskite and Cr-doped Al2O3, but it lacks specific stoichiometric ratios for the Al2O3:Cr component and fails to clarify whether it represents a single phase or a multi-phase material. Appropriate correction is required such as amending and/or canceling the limitation GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3 of claim 3.
C. In claim 5, the formula Gd0.9La0.075Lu0.0.75Al0.998:Cr0.002 appears to contain a typographical error "La0.075Lu0.0.75" The A-site stoichiometry (Gd + La + La = 0.9 + 0.075 + 0.075 = 1.05) exceeds 1.0, leading to a charge imbalance in the perovskite structure. Appropriate correction is required such as amending and/or canceling the limitation Gd0.9La0.075Lu0.0.75Al0.998:Cr0.002.
In Re claims 2-16, they are objected to due to their dependence from claim 1.
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.
As documented in the 7/1/2025 PCT Written Opinion of the International Search Authority from the 11/7/2025 Information Disclosure Sheet, the examiner points out that in the written description as summarized below:
2.2: The formula GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3 in claim 3 is ambiguous. The notation suggests a composite or mixture of a Gd-based perovskite and Cr-doped Al2O3, but it lacks specific stoichiometric ratios for the Al2O3:Cr component and fails to clarify whether it represents a single phase or a multi-phase material.
Moreover, GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002 is presented as a comparative example, not an inventive embodiment of the claimed phosphor. Its inclusion in claim 3, particularly within the ambiguous composite GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3:Cr, introduces further uncertainty about whether it falls within the scope of the inventive concept. This inconsistency between the claim and the description violates the clarity and support requirements of the written description.
2.3: In claim 5, the formula Gd0.9La0.075Lu0.0.75Al0.998:Cr0.002 appears to contain a typographical error "La0.075Lu0.0.75" The A-site stoichiometry (Gd + La + La = 0.9 + 0.075 + 0.075 = 1.05) exceeds 1.0, leading to a charge imbalance in the perovskite structure. This stoichiometric error, combined with the unclear notation, violates the clarity and support requirements of the written description.
2.4: The formula Gd0.99Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 in claim 5 has an A-site stoichiometry of 0.99 (Gd0.99), which is less than 1.0, resulting in a charge imbalance for the perovskite structure. Assuming typical oxidation states (Gd³⁺, Al³⁺, Cr³⁺, O²⁻), the cation charge does not balance the 6⁻ charge from three O²⁻ ions, rendering the formula stoichiometrically unclear, and violates the clarity and support requirements of the written description.
2.5: The description identifies Gd0.99Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Yb0.01 (Example 9) as an inventive example. However, this formula lacks lanthanum (La), contradicting claim 1's requirement for La (0 < X ≤ 1 in This inconsistency renders Example 9 unclear and unsupported under the requirements of the written description.
The examiner is noting, per MPEP § 2164.03 I., the above cites from the PCT Written Opinion since they appear to rise to the level of being non-compliant with the 35 U.S.C. 112(a), first paragraph “Written Description” requirements. The examiner suggests the applicant amend the specification and claims in light of the above cites to overcome the Written Requirement rejection.
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the values of x, y and z for the expression Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu) in line 2 of the claim.
For examination purposes, the values of x, y and z will be interpreted to have the values of 0 < x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1, 0 < z ≤ 0.01 (similar to claim 1 and consistent with the instant specification).
The rejection may be overcome by amending the claim to include values of x, y and z (similar to claim 1 and consistent with the instant specification) for the expression Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jagt (US 2012/0001204 A1).
Re claim 17, Jagt discloses in FIG. 1 a luminescent sensing device (1), comprising:
a light device (2; [0032]) comprising at least one of a light emitting diode (LED; [0032]) and laser diode (LD);
a luminescent material (4; [0032]) arranged to receive a first light (420-480; [0033]) from the light device (2) and comprising a phosphor converter ([0036]) doped with one or more rare earth elements (Gd, Lu, Y, Tb; [0036]), the luminescent material (4) configured to emit a second light (from 420-800 nm; [0035]).
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.
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, 4-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amiya et al (US 2019/0165221 A1, hereafter Amiya) in view of Tamaoki et al (JP H07286171 A1-IDS prior art original and translation provided, hereafter Tamaoki).
Re claim 1, Amiya discloses in FIG. 1 a converter structure (100) comprising:
a substrate (40; 0035]);
a luminescent material (50/72; [0035]) directly attached to the substrate (40) and comprising (Gd, Y, La, Tb) (Al, Sc, Ga)O3:Cr ([0086]), the luminescent material (50/72) configured to absorb light (from 10; [0036]) of a first wavelength range (380-490 nm; [0036]) and emit light of a second wavelength range (680-800 nm; [0036]).
Amiya fails to explicitly disclose the luminescent material (50/72) comprising Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu) with 0 < x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1, 0 < z ≤ 0.01.
However,
Tamaoki discloses second luminescent material(s) comprising the formula RAlO3:xCr, where R includes any of Y, La and Gd, and x is 0.0005 < x < 0.008 ([0011]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Amiya and Tamaoki, through routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05), to formulate luminescent material (50/72) to comprise Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu) with 0 X ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1, 0 < Z ≤ 0.01 (e.g. Gd0.5La0.25Y0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002) for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/70) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm.
Re claim 4, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein the luminescent material (of Amiya modified by Tamaoki) is a powder phosphor (Tamaoki; between [0027]-[0044]), as part of the formulated luminescent material for the tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/70) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 5, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 4.
But, do not explicitly disclose wherein the luminescent material comprises one of Gd0.9La0.075Lu0.0.75Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 (see the objections and/or 112 rejections above), Gd0.8La0.1Lu0.1Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Gd0.7La0.15Lu0.15 Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, and Gd0.99 Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 (see the objections and/or 112 rejections above).
However, Amiya discloses second luminescent materials comprising (containing) at least one element selected from the group consisting of rare earth elements ([0015]), which would include Lu, in addition to Gd, Y, La, Tb disclosed for claim 1.
The inclusion of Lu would allow for, through routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05), the luminescent material to comprise one of Gd0.8La0.1Lu0.1Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 or Gd0.7La0.15Lu0.15, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/70) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 6, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein x is not equal to zero when Gd0.5La0.25Y0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 is formed as discussed for claim 1, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 7, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1.
But, do not explicitly disclose wherein y is equal to zero.
However, the combined disclosures Amiya and Tamaoki would allow for the formulation of Gd0.75La0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 (y=0), for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 8, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein y is not equal to zero when Gd0.5La0.25Y0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 is formed as discussed for claim 1, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 9, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein RE = Y (see claims 1, 6 and 8), for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 10, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1.
But, do not explicitly disclose wherein RE = Yb.
However, Amiya discloses second luminescent materials comprising (containing) at least one element selected from the group consisting of rare earth elements ([0015]), which would include Yb, in addition to Gd, Y, La, Tb disclosed for claim 1.
The inclusion of Yb would allow for, through routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05), a Yb comprised luminescent material, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 11, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein RE = Lu (see claim 5), for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 12, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1.
But, do not explicitly disclose wherein x+y = 1. However, the combined disclosures Amiya and Tamaoki would allow for the formulations of Gd0.925(La0.5Lu0.5)0.075Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 and Gd0.85(La0.5Lu0.5)0.15Al0.998O3:Cr0.002 (x+y=1), for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 15, Amiya discloses the converter structure of claim 1, wherein the first wavelength range has a peak wavelength 400-450 nm (380-490 nm; [0036]).
Re claim 16, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1, wherein the second wavelength range has a peak emission from (Amiya: 680-800 nm; [0036] and Tamaoki: 700-750 nm; FIGS. 2-4), which can be adjusted, through routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05), for a peak emission from 720-740 nm, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/70) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Claims 2-3 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amiya and Tamaoki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jagt (US 2012/0001204 A1).
Re claim 2, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 1.
But, fail to disclose wherein the luminescent material (of Amiya modified by Tamaoki) is a ceramic phosphor.
However, Jagt discloses in FIG. 1 a luminescent device (1), comprising: wherein a rare earth element-based luminescent material (4; [0036]) is a ceramic phosphor ([0042]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Amiya and Tamaoki, by using a ceramic phosphor, as disclosed by Jagt, for the modified luminescent material of Amiya and Tamaoki, to conform the luminescent material into a suitable shape, having approximately the same surface area as a light emitting device of the first wavelength range (Jagt; [0042]), for the of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 3, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose the converter structure of claim 2.
But, do not explicitly disclose wherein the luminescent material comprises one of Gd0.75La0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Gd0.5La0.25Y0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Gd0.925(La0.5Lu0.5)0.075Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, and Gd0.85(La0.5Lu0.5)0.15Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, and GdAl0.998O3:Cr0.002/Al2O3:Cr (see the objections and/or 112 rejections above).
However, the combined disclosures Amiya and Tamaoki would allow for the formulation of at least one of Gd0.75La0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Gd0.5La0.25Y0.25Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, Gd0.925(La0.5Lu0.5)0.075Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, and Gd0.85(La0.5Lu0.5)0.15Al0.998O3:Cr0.002, for the predictable result of tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 13, Amiya discloses the converter structure of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose the converter structure (100) further comprising a second substrate directly attached to the luminescent material (50/72) on an opposite side of the luminescent material (50/72) from the substrate (40).
However, Jagt discloses a second substrate (6; [0070]) directly attached (when 7 is not provided; [0070]) to the luminescent material (4) on an opposite side of the luminescent material (4) from the substrate (3; [0032] or unseen sapphire growth substrate; [0034]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Amiya by adding the second substrate of Jagt, directly attached to the luminescent material (50/72) on an opposite side of the luminescent material (50/72) from the substrate, to convert ambient light into light of a complementary wavelength range which is complementary to the second wavelength range emitted by the luminescent material. Hence, in the off-state of an illumination device, light of the second wavelength range is emitted and/or reflected by the luminescent material, and light of the complementary wavelength range is emitted by the second substrate, such that the resulting combination of the total emitted and/or reflected light thereby reduces the colored appearance of the luminescent material (Jagt; [0046]).
Re claim 14, Amiya discloses the converter structure of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose wherein the substrate (40) is sapphire.
However, Jagt discloses a light device (2; [0034]) on a substrate (growth substrate not shown; [0034]) comprising sapphire ([0034]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Amiya by using the light device of Jagt, as a substitutional equivalent (MPEP § 2144.06) for the light device of Amiya, for producing light in the first wavelength range, the luminescent material (50/72) directly attached to the sapphire substrate, as part the of the tuning the formulated luminescent material (50/72) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm discussed for claim 1.
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jagt in view of Amiya et al (US 2019/0165221 A1, hereafter Amiya) in view of Tamaoki et al (JP H07286171 A1-IDS prior art, hereafter Tamaoki).
Re claim 18, Jagt discloses the luminescent sensing device of claim 17.
But, fails to disclose wherein the luminescent material (4) comprises Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu) with 0 < x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1, 0 < z ≤ 0.01.
However, Amiya and Tamaoki disclose rare earth element-based luminescent materials which would render obvious the limitations wherein the luminescent material (4) comprises Gd1-x-yLaxREyAl1-zO3:Crz (RE = Y, Yb, Lu) with 0 < x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1, 0 < z ≤ 0.01 (see claim 1), as a substitutional equivalents (MPEP § 2144.06) for the luminescent materials of Amiya and Tamaoki, for the of tuning the luminescent material (4) to emit light with a specific peak range within the second wavelength range of 680-800 nm as discussed for claim 1.
Re claim 20, Jagt discloses the luminescent sensing device of claim 17.
But, fails to disclose the luminescent sensing device further comprising a second luminescent material that does not comprise Gd and arranged to receive a first light (380-490 nm; [0036]) of a light device (10; [0036]).
However,
Amiya discloses a second luminescent material (50/71; [0035] and [0065]) that does not comprise Gd ((Ca1-p-qSrpEuq)AlSiN3; [0065]) and arranged to receive the first light of the light device.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Jagt, by adding the second luminescent material that does not comprise Gd of Amiya, arranged to receive the first light of the light device, producing a single structure capable of producing an application specific first light emission peak from one wavelength range and an application specific second light emission peak from a different wavelength range (Amiya; [0036]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jagt in view of Eldridge et al (US 8,695,430 B1-IDS prior art, hereafter Eldridge).
Re claim 19, Jagt discloses the luminescent sensing device of claim 17.
But, fails to disclose the luminescent sensing device (1) further comprising a photodetector arranged to receive the second light (from 420-800 nm) emitted by the luminescent material (4).
However,
Eldridge discloses in FIG. 1 a luminescent sensing device (100) comprising: a photodetector (110; col. 6, lines 55-62) arranged to receive a second light (outputting emission 108; col. 6, lines 21-38) emitted by a rare earth element-based luminescent material (Cr:GdAlO3).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Jagt, by using the optical measurement system of Eldridge, configuring the rare earth element-based luminescent material of Jagt as a substitutional equivalents (MPEP § 2144.06) Thermographic Phosphor, in combination with the additional system components of Eldridge, producing a photodetector arranged to receive the second light emitted by the luminescent material within the second wavelength range (680-800 nm, for at least one of a temperature or pressure sensor (Eldridge; Abstract and col. 5, lines 29-35).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
A. US 11,396,628 B2 discloses Gd-based Perovskite luminescent material ((Gd1-xCrx)AlO.sub.3) without additional rare earth elements as claimed.
B. US 2020/0205415 A1 discloses Cr-doped multiple (Gd and La) rare earth elements-based luminescent material without the required concentrations of Cr and rare earth elements as claimed.
C. US 2009/0212697 A1 discloses powder and ceramic red luminescent material without the required concentrations of Cr and rare earth elements as claimed.
D. US 2008/0128735 A1 discloses a 1st luminescent material without the required concentrations of Cr and rare earth elements and a 2nd non-Gd based luminescent material as claimed.
The state of the art for rare earth element-based luminescent materials appears to be drawn toward Perovskite structures that shift the output peak(s) for use in a variety of sensor type applications (e.g. temperature and pressure).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC W JONES whose telephone number is (408) 918-9765. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 6:00 PM PT.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/ERIC W JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Prosecution Insights