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 .
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.
Claim 8 is 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 8 recites “the first work function tuning layer further comprises a second portion over the second portion of the barrier layer, and wherein when the first portion of the first work function tuning layer is thinned, the second portion of the barrier layer is protected by the first work function tuning layer that comprise aluminum”. The Examiner would like to know how the first portion of the work function tuning layer can be thinned if it has already been removed. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will take this as “wherein when first portion of the barrier layer is thinned…” or “wherein when the first portion of the first work function tuning layer is removed”. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,742,395 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11289,578 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,513,961 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
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(s) 17, 18, 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (US 2017/0032972 A1).
In regards to claim 17, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
a method comprising: forming a barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) comprising a first portion over a first semiconductor region (items 200, 300, 400 or 500); forming a titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108 or 100 plus 104 plus 108) comprising aluminum therein (paragraph 51), wherein the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) comprising a first portion over the first portion of the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98); removing the first portion of the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108); and after the first portion of the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) is removed, depositing a work function layer (item 122) over the first portion of the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), wherein the work function layer (item 122) further comprises aluminum (paragraph 57).
In regards to claim 18, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
further comprising, after the first portion of the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) is removed, removing a top portion of the first portion of the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), wherein a bottom portion of the first portion of the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) remains.
In regards to claim 20, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
wherein the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) further comprises a second portion extending on a second semiconductor fin (item 72), and the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) further comprises a second portion over the second portion of the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), and wherein when the first portion of the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) is removed, the second portion of the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) is protected from being removed.
In regards to claim 21, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
wherein the barrier layer (item 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) comprises tantalum nitride (paragraph 44).
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) in view of Cabral, Jr. et al. (Cabral, Jr.) (US 2014/0106531 A1).
In regard to claim 19, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) does not specifically disclose wherein the forming the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) comprises: depositing the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108); and after the titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104 or 108) is deposited, thermal soaking the titanium nitride layer in an aluminum-containing gas.
In regards to claim 19, Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the aluminum is doped through thermal soaking the titanium nitride layer (item 15) in an aluminum-containing process gas (paragraphs 34-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Cabral Jr. for the purpose of effective work function tuning.
Claim(s) 2-5, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) as evidence by or in view of Lee et al. (Lee) (US 2018/0261677 A1) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 10,049,940 B1).
In regards to claim 2, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text) discloses a method comprising: forming a gate dielectric (item 94) comprising a first portion over a first semiconductor region (item 72); forming a barrier layer (items 96, 98or 96 plus 98) comprising a first portion over the first portion of the gate dielectric (item 94); forming a first work function tuning layer (item 100) comprising a first portion over the first portion of the barrier layer (items 96, 98or 96 plus 98), wherein the first portion of the first work function tuning layer (item 100) comprises aluminum; removing the first portion of the first work function tuning layer (item 100) from the barrier layer (items 96, 98or 96 plus 98); after the first portion of the first work function tuning layer (item 100) is removed, forming a work function layer (item 122) over the first portion of the barrier layer (items 96, 98or 96 plus 98), but does not specifically disclose the first work function layer comprises aluminum.
As evidenced by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text), a first work function tuning layer (item 124p) can comprise aluminum (paragraph 203, TiAl, TiAlN, TiAlC, TiAlCn).
It would have been obvious to modify the invention to include teachings of Lee, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416).
Tsai as evidenced/modified by Lee does not specifically disclose thinning the first portion of the barrier layer; and after the thinning, forming a work function layer over the first portion of the barrier layer.
Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses wherein the first portion of the first work
function tuning layer (item 130, Fig. 8) extends into a trench (item 116a) between gate spacers
(item 112), and a first bottom part of the first portion of the work function tuning layer (item 130) at a bottom of the trench (item 116a) is removed; thinning the first portion of the barrier
layer (item 126): wherein a second bottom part of the barrier layer (item 126) at the bottom of
the trench (item 116a) is thinned (item 126 becomes 126A with roughened surface 125,
column 9, lines 1-44), and after the thinning, forming a work function layer (item 128) over the first portion of the barrier layer (item 126/126A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Chen for the purpose of effective work function tuning and requirements (col. 9, lines 40-44).
In regards to claim 3, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text) as modified by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text) and Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses wherein the work function layer (item 122, paragraph 57, Tsai, item 134, Chen), further comprises aluminum.
In regards to claim 4, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text) as modified by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text) and Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses wherein both of the work function layer (item 122, paragraph 57, Tsai, item 128, Chen) and the removed first portion of the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee) comprise TiAlN.
In regards to claim 5, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text) as modified by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text) and Cabral Jr. discloses wherein the forming the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee) comprises depositing the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee), wherein the aluminum is in-situ doped when the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, paragraph 205, Lee) is deposited.
In regards to claim 8, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) as modified by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text) and Cabral Jr. discloses
wherein the gate dielectric (item 94) further comprises a second portion extending on a second
semiconductor region (item 72), the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) further comprises
a second portion extending over the second portion of the gate dielectric (item 94). and the first
work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee) further comprises a second portion extending over the second portion of the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), and wherein when the first portion of the first work function tuning layer (item 100) is removed, the second portion of the barrier layer items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) is protected by the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee) that comprises aluminum.
In regards to claim 9, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
before the first work function tuning layer (item 100) is formed, forming a second work function
tuning layer (item 104); and after the second work function tuning layer (item 104) is formed,
patterning the second work function tuning layer (item 104) to remove a portion of the second
work function tuning layer (item 104) overlapping the first portion of the barrier layer (item 96,
98 or 96 plus 98).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) as evidence by or in view of Lee et al. (Lee) (US 2018/0261677 A1) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 10,049,940 B1) as applied to claims 2-4 above and further evidence by or in view of Feller et al. (Feller) (US 2006/0097347 A1).
In regards to claim 5, Tsai (Figs. 10-17, 19 and associated text) as modified by Lee (paragraph 203, Figs. 21-23 and associated text) and Cabral Jr. discloses wherein the forming the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee) comprises depositing the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, Lee), wherein the aluminum is in-situ doped when the first work function tuning layer (item 100, Tsai, item 124p, paragraph 205, Lee) is deposited, but does not specifically disclose in situ doping.
As evidenced by Feller (paragraph 33, Figs. 2a-2f and associated text), work function layers (item 204) can be doped by various doping techniques well known in the art such as ion implantation or in situ doping techniques (paragraph 33, “impurities may comprise lanthanide metals, alkali metals, alkaline earth metals, scandium, zirconium, hafnium, aluminum, titanium, tantalum, niobium, tungsten, nitrogen, chlorine, oxygen, fluorine, and bromine”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Feller for the purpose of effective work function tuning (shift the work function) and requirements (paragraph 33).
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) as evidence by or in view of Lee et al. (Lee) (US 2018/0261677 A1) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 10,049,940 B1) as applied to claims 2-5 above, and further in view of Cabral, Jr. et al. (Cabral, Jr.) (US 2014/0106531 A1).
In regard to claim 6, Tsai as modified by Lee and Chen does not specifically disclose wherein the forming the first work function tuning layer comprises depositing the first work function tuning layer, and wherein the aluminum is doped into the first work function tuning layer after the first work function tuning layer is deposited.
Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the forming the first work function tuning layer (item 15) comprises depositing the first work function tuning layer (item 15), and wherein the aluminum is doped into the first work function tuning layer (item 15, paragraph 36) after the first work function tuning layer (item 15) is deposited.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Cabral Jr. for the purpose of effective work function tuning.
In regards to claim 7, Tsai as modified by Lee, Chen and Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the aluminum is doped through thermal soaking the first work function tuning layer (item 15) in an aluminum-containing process gas (paragraphs 34-36).
Claim(s) 10, 11, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 10,049,940 B1).
In regards to claim 10, Tsai (Figs. 9-17, 19 and associated text and items) discloses
a method comprising: removing a first dummy gate stack (items 76 plus 78 plus 80, Fig. 9) and a second dummy gate stack (items 76 plus 78 plus 80, Fig. 9) to form a first trench and a second trench (shown but not labeled, Fig. 10), respectively, in a dielectric layer (item 90), wherein the first trench and the second trench (shown but not labeled, Fig. 10) are in a first transistor region (items 200, 300, 400 or 500) and a second transistor region (items 200, 300, 400 or 500), respectively; depositing a barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) comprising tantalum nitride (paragraph 44), wherein the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98) comprises a first portion and a second portion in the first trench and the second trench (shown but not labeled, Fig. 10), respectively; forming a first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) comprising a first portion and a second portion overlapping the first portion and the second portion, respectively, of the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), wherein the first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) comprises aluminum therein (paragraph 51), but does not specifically disclose removing an entirety of the first portion of the first titanium nitride layer in the first trench, wherein the second portion of the first titanium nitride layer remains after the removing; and partially etching the barrier layer at a bottom of the first trench to reduce a thickness of the first portion of the barrier layer, wherein the second portion of the barrier layer is protected from being etched.
Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses removing an entirety of the first portion of the first titanium nitride layer (item 130) in the first trench (item 116a), wherein the second portion of the first titanium nitride layer (item 130) remains after the removing; and partially etching the barrier layer (item 126 which becomes 126A) at a bottom of the first trench to reduce a thickness of the first portion of the barrier layer (item 126 which becomes 126A, col. 9, lines 40-44), wherein the second portion of the barrier layer (item 126) is protected from being etched.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Chen for the purpose of effective work function tuning and requirements (col. 9, lines 40-44).
In regards to claim 10, Tsai (Figs. 9-17, 19 and associated text and items) as modified by Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses further comprising forming a work function layer (item 122) comprising a first portion directly contacting the first portion of the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98), and a second portion directly contacting the second portion of the first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110).
In regards to claim 15, Tsai (Figs. 9-17, 19 and associated text and items) as modified by Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses wherein when the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98, Tsai, item 126 which becomes 126A, Chen) is partially etched, the second portion of the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98, Tsai, item 126 Chen) is protected by the second portion of the first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110).
In regards to claim 16, Tsai (Figs. 9-17, 19 and associated text and items) as modified by Chen (Figs. 7-13 and associated text) discloses wherein the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98, Tsai, item 126 Chen) further comprises a third portion in a third transistor region (item 200, 300, 400 or 500), and the first titanium nitride layer items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) further comprises a third portion over the third portion of the barrier layer, and the method further comprises: before the first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) is formed, depositing a second titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) comprising a first portion, a second portion, and a third portion overlapping the first portion, the second portion, and the third portion, respectively, of the barrier layer (items 96, 98 or 96 plus 98, Tsai, item 126 Chen); and before the first titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110) is formed, removing the first portion and the second portion of the second titanium nitride layer (items 100, 104, 108, 110 or 100 plus 104 plus 108 plus 110).
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (Tsai) (US 2017/0032972 A1) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (US 10,049,940 B1) as applied to claims 10, 11, 15 and 16 above, and further in view of Cabral, Jr. et al. (Cabral, Jr.) (US 2014/0106531 A1) evidence by or in view of Feller et al. (Feller) (US 2006/0097347 A1).
In regard to claim 12, Tsai as modified by Chen does not specifically disclose wherein the forming the first titanium nitride layer comprises: depositing the first titanium nitride layer, wherein aluminum is in-situ doped into the first titanium nitride layer when the first titanium nitride layer is deposited.
Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the forming the first titanium nitride layer (item 15) comprises depositing the first titanium nitride layer (item 15), and wherein the aluminum is doped into the first work function tuning layer (item 15, paragraph 36) after the first work function tuning layer (item 15) is deposited.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Cabral Jr. for the purpose of effective work function tuning.
As evidenced by Feller (paragraph 33, Figs. 2a-2f and associated text), layers (item 204) can be doped by various doping techniques well known in the art such as ion implantation or in situ doping techniques (paragraph 33, “impurities may comprise lanthanide metals, alkali metals, alkaline earth metals, scandium, zirconium, hafnium, aluminum, titanium, tantalum, niobium, tungsten, nitrogen, chlorine, oxygen, fluorine, and bromine”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Feller for the purpose of effective work function tuning (shift the work function) and requirements (paragraph 33).
In regards to claim 13, Tsai as modified by Chen and Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the forming the first titanium nitride layer (item 15) comprises: depositing the first titanium nitride layer (item 15); and after the first titanium nitride layer (item 15) is deposited, thermally soaking the first titanium nitride layer (item 15) in an aluminum-containing process gas (paragraphs 34-36).
In regards to claim 14, Tsai as modified by Chen and Cabral Jr. (paragraphs 34-36, Figs. 4B, 5B and associated text) discloses wherein the aluminum-containing process gas comprises aluminum chloride.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TELLY D GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3204. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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.
TELLY D. GREEN
Examiner
Art Unit 2898
/TELLY D GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898 August 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights