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 were received on 5/30/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: movement means in claims 1, 10 and 11.
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.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Amanullah et al. (US20190033233, hereinafter “Amanullah”)
Claim 1. Amanullah teaches An inspecting method for detecting a target object included in an inspected object (Abstract “inspection system for inspecting a semiconductor wafer”) by capturing an image of the target object with an inspecting device, (Abstract “The inspection system further comprises a first image capture device”)
the inspecting device including:
an imaging device that captures an image of the inspected object ([0073] “image capture devices for capturing … images”) and outputs the image; ([0259] “image are displayed on a screen or monitor”)
a lighting device; ([0073] “The low angle darkfield illuminator 28 and the high angle darkfield illuminator 30 are also known as darkfield illumination sources, and emits or supplies darkfield illumination. Darkfield illuminators are carefully aligned illumination or light sources”)
movement means; ([0185] “semiconductor wafer 12 onto the movable support platform” and [0087] “The inspection of the semiconductor wafer 12 for detecting possible defects thereon is performed while the semiconductor wafer 12 is in motion.” Is understood to be the same as the claimed movement means in light of instant specifications [0014] and claim 11) and
an image processing device, ([0095] “The CPU is programmable for processing information, more specifically the images,”) and
the method comprising:
an irradiation step of irradiating, by the lighting device, ([0199] “More specifically, the steps 502 to 512 are preferably repeated for capturing images with the first illumination and the second illumination of the semiconductor wafer 12”) the inspected object with light a plurality of times in one imaging time; ([0199] “The steps 502 to 512 can be repeated any number of times for capturing a corresponding number of sets of first images and second images of the semiconductor wafer 12.”)
a movement step of changing, by the movement means, relative positions of the lighting device, the imaging device, and the inspected object in the one imaging time; ([0199] “More specifically, the steps 502 to 512 are preferably repeated for capturing images with the first illumination and the second illumination of the semiconductor wafer 12 at each of the plurality of image capture positions along the wafer scan motion path as calculated in the step 408.”) and
a determination step of extracting, by the image processing device, a plurality of images of the target object included in the image output by the imaging device, and combining the plurality of extracted images of the target object ([0201] “combined image of the first image and the second image”) to determine a size of the target object. ([0005] “estimating size of defects” and [0212] “If more than one defects are detected or identified in the step 616, the algorithm would sort the defects from the largest to the shortest based on either one or all of area, length, width,”)
Claim 10. Amanullah teaches An inspecting device that detects a target object included in an inspected object, (Abstract “inspection system for inspecting a semiconductor wafer”) the inspecting device comprising:
an imaging device that captures an image (Abstract “The inspection system further comprises a first image capture device”)
of the inspected object ([0073] “image capture devices for capturing … images”) and outputs the image; ([0259] “image are displayed on a screen or monitor”)
a lighting device; ([0073] “The low angle darkfield illuminator 28 and the high angle darkfield illuminator 30 are also known as darkfield illumination sources, and emits or supplies darkfield illumination. Darkfield illuminators are carefully aligned illumination or light sources”)
movement means; ([0185] “semiconductor wafer 12 onto the movable support platform” and [0087] “The inspection of the semiconductor wafer 12 for detecting possible defects thereon is performed while the semiconductor wafer 12 is in motion.” Is understood to be the same as the claimed movement means in light of instant specifications [0014] and claim 11) and
an image processing device, ([0095] “The CPU is programmable for processing information, more specifically the images,”) wherein
the lighting device irradiates the inspected object ([0199] “More specifically, the steps 502 to 512 are preferably repeated for capturing images with the first illumination and the second illumination of the semiconductor wafer 12”) with the plurality of times of light in one imaging time, ([0199] “The steps 502 to 512 can be repeated any number of times for capturing a corresponding number of sets of first images and second images of the semiconductor wafer 12.”)
the movement means changes relative positions of the lighting device, the imaging device, and the inspected object in the one imaging time, ([0199] “More specifically, the steps 502 to 512 are preferably repeated for capturing images with the first illumination and the second illumination of the semiconductor wafer 12 at each of the plurality of image capture positions along the wafer scan motion path as calculated in the step 408.”) and
the image processing device extracts a plurality of images of the target object included in the image output by the imaging device, and combines the plurality of extracted images of the target object ([0201] “combined image of the first image and the second image”) to determine a size of the target object. ([0005] “estimating size of defects” and [0212] “If more than one defects are detected or identified in the step 616, the algorithm would sort the defects from the largest to the shortest based on either one or all of area, length, width,”)
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amanullah et al. (US20190033233, hereinafter “Amanullah”) and in view of Kawaguchi et al (US20080055600, hereinafter “Kawaguchi”) and in view of Kusumi et al (US20190295235, hereinafter “Kusumi”)
Claim 2. Amanullah teaches The inspecting method according to Claim 1, wherein the inspecting device further includes an actuator ([0185] “semiconductor wafer 12 onto the movable support platform” and [0087] “The inspection of the semiconductor wafer 12 for detecting possible defects thereon is performed while the semiconductor wafer 12 is in motion.”) that changes positions of the lighting device and the imaging device, ([0199] “More specifically, the steps 502 to 512 are preferably repeated for capturing images with the first illumination and the second illumination of the semiconductor wafer 12 at each of the plurality of image capture positions along the wafer scan motion path as calculated in the step 408.”)
Amanullah does not explicitly teach the method further comprising moving, by an actuator, the lighting device and the imaging device in a direction perpendicular to a conveying direction of the inspected object in the movement step.
Kawaguchi teaches the method further comprising moving the imaging device ([0009] “transport unit for transporting the detector”) in a direction perpendicular to a conveying direction of the inspected object in the movement step. ([0058] “The defect inspection method causes the photoelectric image sensors to detect the light reflected from the inspection target at fixed intervals relative to a single line direction region in a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the inspection target moves,”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amanullah to have an actuator that moves the imaging device in a perpendicular direction of the inspected object as taught by Kawaguchi to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to (Kawaguchi [0010] “raise the inspection speed of a defect inspection apparatus by providing a high-speed detector without requiring a huge development cost or a long development period and without lowering the yield rate.” )
Kawaguchi does not explicitly teach moving, by an actuator, the lighting device
Kusumi teaches moving, by an actuator, the lighting device ([0042] “irradiating light from a single light source while changing the position of the single light source (using a driver or the like)”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the proposed combination of Amanullah and Kawaguchi to have an actuator that moves the lighting device as taught by Kusumi to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to because it (Kusumi [0040] “generates a rendered image (a rewritten image) under a desired light source condition selected by the user.”)
Claim 12. Amanullah teaches The inspecting device according to Claim 10, further comprising
Amanullah does not explicitly teach an actuator that moves the lighting device and the imaging device.
Kawaguchi teaches an actuator that moves the imaging device. ([0009] “transport unit for transporting the detector”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amanullah to have an actuator that moves the imaging device as taught by Kawaguchi to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to (Kawaguchi [0010] “raise the inspection speed of a defect inspection apparatus by providing a high-speed detector without requiring a huge development cost or a long development period and without lowering the yield rate.” )
Kawaguchi does not explicitly teach an actuator that moves the lighting device
Kusumi teaches an actuator that moves the lighting device ([0042] “irradiating light from a single light source while changing the position of the single light source (using a driver or the like)”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the proposed combination of Amanullah and Kawaguchi to have an actuator that moves the lighting device as taught by Kusumi to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to because it (Kusumi [0040] “generates a rendered image (a rewritten image) under a desired light source condition selected by the user.”)
Claims 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amanullah et al. (US20190033233, hereinafter “Amanullah”) and in view of Kawaguchi et al (US20080055600, hereinafter “Kawaguchi”)
Claim 3. Amanullah teaches The inspecting method according to Claim 1, wherein
the lighting device is capable of emitting light in a first wavelength band, ([0012] “wavelength of the brightfield is limited between 400 to 600 nm using mercury arc lamp”) light in a second wavelength band, ([0012] “darkfield is limited between 650 to 700 nm using lasers.”) light in a third wavelength band, ([0074] “low angle darkfield illuminator 28 and the high angle darkfield illuminator 30 supply darkfield illumination of different wavelengths” is understood to be the same as the claimed third wavelength band) and light in a reference wavelength band having a wavelength band overlapping with the first, second, and third wavelength bands, ([0071] “broadband brightfield illumination comprising wavelengths of substantially between and including 300 nm and 1000 nm.”)
the method further comprising:
irradiating, by the lighting device, the inspected object with the light in the first wavelength band, the light in the second wavelength band, the light in the third wavelength band, and the light in the reference wavelength band ([0077] “both the brightfield illumination and the darkfield illuminations enable the inspection of the wafer 12 to be performed independent of reflective characteristics of the semiconductor wafer 12.”) at different timings in the one imaging time in the irradiation step, (fig. 21 shows the irradiating happens are different timings )
PNG
media_image1.png
343
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and
calculating, by the image processing device, a first reflectance that is a reflectance in the first wavelength band, a second reflectance that is a reflectance in the second wavelength band, and a third reflectance that is a reflectance in the third wavelength band of the target object based on the image output from the imaging device, ([0153] “The n images can be captured using at least one of the first image capture device 32, the second image capture device 34 and the review image capture device 62 as required. Alternatively, the n images are captured using a different image capture device. Illuminations used for capture of the n images can be varied as required, and are for example one or combination of the brightfield illumination, the DHA illumination and the DLA illumination. Colors and intensities of the illuminations used for capture of the n images can be selected, and varied, as required.” First image capture device, Second image capture device and review image capture device are understood to be the same as the claimed calculating first, second and third reflectance’s by the image processing device respectively.) and determining a physical property of the target object based on the first reflectance, the second reflectance, ([0077] “The wavelength spectrums of both the brightfield illumination and darkfield illuminations preferably enhance accuracy of inspection and defect detection of the semiconductor wafers 12.”)
Amanullah does not explicitly teach and the third reflectance in the determination step.
Kawaguchi teaches determining a physical property of the target object ([0042] “FIG. 4 shows a typical detector configuration in which image sensors having different spectral sensitivities are arranged in a lattice pattern to form a plurality of lines within the defect inspection apparatus according to the present invention.”) based on the first reflectance, the second reflectance, and the third reflectance in the determination step. ([0044] “Although the present embodiment assumes that the image sensors are arranged for two different wavelengths (wavelengths A and B), the image sensors may be arranged for three or more different wavelengths.”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amanullah to have detecting defects of a semiconductor based on a first, second and third reflectance as taught by Kawaguchi to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to (Kawaguchi [0010] “raise the inspection speed of a defect inspection apparatus by providing a high-speed detector without requiring a huge development cost or a long development period and without lowering the yield rate.” )
Claim 4. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 3, further comprising
Amanullah teaches a step of comparing, by the image processing device, the first reflectance, the second reflectance, ([0148] “captured images of the semiconductor wafers 12 are compared”) with spectral reflectance data indicating spectral reflectances of a plurality of substances ([0148] “The exemplary method 400 for inspecting semiconductor wafers 12 utilizes reference images (also known as golden references)” is understood to be the same as the claimed spectral reflectance data…of a plurality of substances) to determine the physical property of the target object.
Amanullah does not explicitly teach and the third reflectance
Kawaguchi teaches and the third reflectance ([0044]“image sensors may be arranged for three or more different wavelengths.”)
Claim 5. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 3, further comprising
Amanullah teaches a step of generating, by the image processing device, a remaining one image ([0212] “calculate defective region of interest (DROI).”) from any two of a first image that is an image of the target object by light in the first wavelength band, a second image that is an image of the target object by the second wavelength band, a third image that is an image of the target object by the third wavelength band, ([0207] “The first working image is selected from the number of first images and second images captured”) and a reference image that is an image of the target object by the reference wavelength band ([0211] “The matching or evaluation of the first working image with the first reference image facilitates detection or identification of defects on the semiconductor wafer 12.”) in a case where a plurality of the target objects are present on the inspected object. ([0212] “If more than one defects are detected or identified in the step 616, the algorithm would sort the defects from the largest to the shortest based on either one or all of area, length, width, contrast, compactness, fill factor, edge strength among others. Further the algorithm selects only those defects which meets user defined criteria to calculate defective region of interest (DROI). If a defect (or more than one defects) is detected or identified in the step 616, DROI on the semiconductor wafer 12 is then calculated in a step 618.”)
Claim 6. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 5, further comprising
Amanullah teaches a step of combining, by the image processing device, feature quantities ([0268] “matching between working images and reference images is provided below. Firstly, subpixel alignment of the selected working image is performed using known references including, but not limited to, templates, trace, bumps, pads and other unique patterns.”) of the first image, the second image to generate the reference image. ([0209] “The first reference image selected in the step 608 corresponds or matches with the first working image.” is understood to be the same as the claimed combining feature quantities of the first and second and third images to generate a reference image in light of instant specifications [0098])
Amanullah does not explicitly teach and the third image
Kawaguchi and the third image ([0044]“image sensors may be arranged for three or more different wavelengths.”)
Claim 7. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 5, further comprising
Amanullah teaches a step of subtracting, by the image processing device, a feature quantity of the first image from a feature quantity of the reference image([0271] “If the difference between the quantitative data values of pixels of the working image and pixels of the reference image is greater than the predetermined threshold values, a defect (or defects) is flagged.”) to generate the third image ([0215] “the detected defect, and the location and classification thereof, is saved in the database of the CPU. Alternatively, the detected defect, and the location and classification thereof, is saved in an alternative database or memory space.” And [0248] “the consolidated and saved first images and second images of the defects detected on the semiconductor wafer 12 are uploaded or transferred to an external storage”)
Claim 8. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 6,
Amanullah teaches wherein the feature quantity is a luminance value or brightness of the target object. ([0160] “range of absolute intensity (hereinafter referred to as Ri) for each pixel of the n images is calculated” and [0177] “The average intensity of each pixel is preferably normalized to 255” is understood to be the same as the claimed luminance or brightness in light of instant specifications [0094])
Claim 9. Amanullah and Kawaguchi teach The inspecting method according to Claim 3, further comprising:
Amanullah teaches a step of generating, by the image processing device, the first image that is the image of the target object ([0153] “The n images can be captured using at least one of the first image capture device 32, the second image capture device 34 and the review image capture device 62 as required.”) by the light in the first wavelength band, ([0012] “wavelength of the brightfield is limited between 400 to 600 nm using mercury arc lamp”) the second image that is the image of the target object by the second wavelength band, ([0012] “darkfield is limited between 650 to 700 nm using lasers.” and [0153] “The n images can be captured using at least one of the first image capture device 32, the second image capture device 34 and the review image capture device 62 as required. Alternatively, the n images are captured using a different image capture device. Illuminations used for capture of the n images can be varied as required, and are for example one or combination of the brightfield illumination, the DHA illumination and the DLA illumination. Colors and intensities of the illuminations used for capture of the n images can be selected, and varied, as required.”), and the reference image that is the image of the target object by the reference wavelength band for each of the plurality of target objects in a case where a plurality of the target objects are present on the inspected object; ([0279] “The reference image creation process 900 allows for application of different thresholds of intensities across different locations of the semiconductor wafer, thus accommodating non-linear illumination variations across the semiconductor wafer. The method 400 therefore facilitates reduction in false or unwanted detection of defects”)
a step of classifying, by the image processing device, the first image, ([0211] “The programmable controller preferably carries out a series of computing instructions or algorithms for matching the first working image”) the second image,([0213] “second working image is inspected… the step 620 facilitates classification of defect detected”) and the reference image for each of the plurality of target objects; ([0211] “with the first reference image to thereby enable the detection or identification of defects on the semiconductor wafer 12.”)
and
a step of calculating, by the image processing device, the first reflectance and the second reflectance based on the first image, ([0213] “This is to say, the DROI of the second image (which is a corresponding image of the first image), is inspected in the step 620 after performing sub-pixel alignment of second working image.”) the second image and the reference image classified into the same group. ([0255] “Consolidated and saved first images and second images of defects detected on the second semiconductor wafer 12 are uploaded to the external storage or server.”)
Amanullah does not explicitly teach the third image that is the image of the target object by the third wavelength band, the third image
Kawaguchi teaches the third image that is the image of the target object by the third wavelength band, the third image ([0044]“image sensors may be arranged for three or more different wavelengths.”)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amanullah et al. (US20190033233, hereinafter “Amanullah”) and in view of Mahajan et al (US10753882, hereinafter “Mahajan”)
Claim 11. Amanullah teaches The inspecting device according to Claim 10,
Amanullah does not explicitly teach wherein the movement means is a roller that conveys an inspected object.
Mahajan teaches wherein the movement means is a roller that conveys an inspected object. (col5line57 “conveyance system 202 which transports an object to a unit for evaluation….A conveyance system may comprise frames supporting rollers,”)
It would have been obvious to persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amanullah to have a movement means that is a roller that conveys an inspected object as taught by Mahajan to arrive at the claimed invention discussed above. The motivation for the proposed modification would have been to have an (Mahajan col1line16 “improved system, method and device for the detection, identification, analysis and grading of surface defects” )
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Tamura et al US20130322735 teaches a stage that changes positions relative to a light source to detect a defect when the size of it is beyond a threshold
Ebita Takao et al WO2017169242 teaches defect determination utilizing first and second light sources at various positions
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OWAIS MEMON whose telephone number is (571)272-2168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (7:00am - 4:00pm) CST.
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, Gregory Morse can be reached at (571) 272-3838. 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.
/OWAIS I MEMON/Examiner, Art Unit 2663
Prosecution Insights