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 § 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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 114023842; see English machine translation) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205).
Regarding claim 1, Cai discloses a connection structure for cell and interconnect wires (see Figure 2), comprising a cell (110) and multiple parallel interconnect wires (soldering strips 120) arranged on the cell (see Figure 2), and further comprising a bonding mechanism (glue 112) provided between the interconnect wires and the cell (it is disclosed that glue 112 is used at positions where the soldering strips 120 do not overlap with the fine grid lines 111 to connect the battery cell 110 with the soldering strips 120; [0045]);
the bonding mechanism wraps the interconnect wires from outer sides and then bonds to the cell, so as to fix the interconnect wires to the cell (as set forth above); and
the connection structure for cell and interconnect wires further comprises fingers (fine grid lines 111) provided on the cell perpendicular to the interconnect wires (see Figure 2), but the reference does not expressly disclose wherein an end portion of the cell is provided with a reinforcing grid that is parallel to the fingers;
the reinforcing grid is located between two adjacent fingers and the reinforcing grid is located on an outer side of an outermost interconnect wire;
an inner end of the reinforcing grid is connected to a connecting grid that is vertical, and both ends of the connecting grid are connected to the fingers on both sides of the reinforcing grid; and
the cell is provided with an auxiliary positioning grid overlapping with an end of each interconnect wire for positioning the interconnect wires, wherein the auxiliary positioning grid is perpendicular to the fingers, and the auxiliary positioning grid is located on a front surface or a back surface of the cell and is provided only at a starting end of the interconnect wires.
Chen discloses a connection structure for cell (see Figure 1) comprising an end portion of the cell is provided with a reinforcing grid (221) that is parallel to the fingers (see Figure 3);
the reinforcing grid is located between two adjacent fingers (see Figure 3) and the reinforcing grid is located on an outer side of an outermost interconnect wire (area 11);
an inner end of the reinforcing grid is connected to a connecting grid that is vertical (21’), and both ends of the connecting grid are connected to the fingers on both sides of the reinforcing grid (see Figures 1 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated additional finger electrodes parallel to the fingers located between two adjacent fingers in the manner as described above in the device of Cai, as taught by Chen, so that current collection and transmission capabilities can be improved in the edge region outside of the outermost busbar in order to maintain uniformity of current transmission, as taught by Chen ([0031]).
Lee discloses a connection structure for cell (see Figure 3) comprising an auxiliary positioning grid (350) for positioning the interconnect wires (370), wherein the auxiliary positioning grid is perpendicular to the fingers (320), and the auxiliary positioning grid is located on a front surface or a back surface of the cell and is provided only at a starting end of the interconnect wires (see Figure 4A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated an auxiliary positioning grid perpendicular to the fingers in the manner as described above in the device of modified Cai, as taught by Lee, so that the arrangement of the interconnector can be guided and improve carrier collection efficiency ([0018]) as well as improving the cell cracking phenomenon by the interconnector and the weakening of the adhesion between the interconnector and the electrode ([0045]), as taught by Lee.
While modified Cai does not expressly disclose the auxiliary positioning grid overlaps with an end of each interconnect wire, Lee discloses the interconnector 370 may be disposed between the edge collecting electrodes 350 in the edge area E ([0177]) but does not require the interconnector to be disposed between the edge collecting electrodes 350 in the edge area E.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the auxiliary positioning grid to be spaced apart such that the auxiliary positioning grid overlaps with an end of each interconnect wire, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art while the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Regarding claim 2, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the bonding mechanism is a positioning adhesive tape ([0046]), and both sides of the positioning adhesive tape along a length direction adhere to the cell ([0047]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the positioning adhesive tape is a hot-melt adhesive , a high-performance pressure-sensitive adhesive, a UV-catalyzed adhesive, or a PET substrate with the high-performance pressure-sensitive adhesive coated on an end of the PET substrate near the interconnect wires ([0067]).
Regarding claims 6 and 20, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the positioning adhesive tape is block-shaped, and multiple positioning adhesive tapes are arranged on each interconnect wire along the length direction (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses both the front surface and the back surface of the cell are provided with the interconnect wires and the fingers ([0052]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the interconnect wires are of a low-temperature interconnect wire ([0059]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses a base material in a middle of the low-temperature interconnect wire is copper and an outer side of the low-temperature interconnect wire is a solder alloy ([0058]); and
the solder alloy comprises, in addition to tin, at least one or more of lead, bismuth, silver and indium ([0061]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses during lamination with direct heating, the interconnect wires and the fingers are melted and thus fused together at a temperature of 130°C to 170°C ([0069]-[0070]).
While the reference does not expressly disclose a temperature of 120°C to 160°C, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Regarding limitations recited in claim 13 directed to the method of making said connection structure (e.g. “during lamination with direct heating, the interconnect wires and the fingers are melted and thus fused together at a temperature of 120 oC to 160 oC”) it is noted that said limitations are not given patentable weight in the product claims. Even though a product-by-process is defined by the process steps by which the product is made, determination of patentability is based on the product itself and does not depend on its method of production. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 227 USPQ 964 (Fed. Cir. 1985). As the court stated in Thorpe, 777 F.2d at 697, 227 USPQ at 966 (The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. In re Pilkington, 411 F.2d 1345, 1348, 162 USPQ 145, 147 (CCPA 1969). If the product in a product-by-process claim is the same or obvious as the product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product was made by a different process.). See MPEP 2113 and 2114.
Claim(s) 4 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 114023842; see English machine translation) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205) in view of Ishii et al. (US 2017/0141253).
Regarding claims 4 and 18, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but the reference does not expressly disclose the positioning adhesive tape is strip-shaped along a length direction of the interconnect wires.
Ishii discloses a connection structure for cell comprising arranging positioning adhesive tape (32) along a length direction of interconnect wires (31B; see Figure 7).
As modified Cai is not limited to any specific examples of the arrangement of positioning adhesive tape on the interconnect wires and as arranging the positioning adhesive tape to be along a length direction of the interconnect wires was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Ishii above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected any orientation to place the positioning adhesive tape, including along a length direction of the interconnect wires in the device of modified Cai. Said combination would amount to nothing more than the use of a known element for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Regarding claim 14, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but the reference does not expressly disclose a cell assembly, comprising the connection structure for cell and interconnect wires according to claim 1.
Ishii discloses the use of a plurality of cells (71) in an assembly (70) for a desired output (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the cell and connection structure of the device of modified Cai into an assembly, as taught by Ishii, in order to obtain a desired output.
Regarding claim 15, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the interconnect wires are provided on both the front surface and the back surface of the cell ([077]).
Ishii discloses the cell assembly further comprises a front-surface adhesive film layer (encapsulant 14) arranged on the front surface of the cell (see Figure 3), an upper glass (12) arranged on an upper side of the front-surface adhesive film layer (see Figure 3), a back-surface adhesive film layer (encapsulant 14) arranged on the back surface of the cell (see Figure 3), and a cover plate (13) arranged on a lower side of the back-surface adhesive film layer (see Figure 3) ([0042]).
As modified Cai is not limited to any specific examples of the cell assembly and as a cell assembly comprising the above-recited features was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Ishii above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected any suitable cell assembly, including the cell assembly as recited-above for the device of modified Cai. Said combination would amount to nothing more than the use of a known element for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Regarding claim 16, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Ishii further discloses the front- surface adhesive film layer and the back-surface adhesive film layer can be made of POE, EVA, or EPE ([0030]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Ishii further discloses the cover plate can be glass or a back plate ([0028]).
Claim(s) 5 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 114023842; see English machine translation) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205) in view of Kim et al. (US 11,302,837).
Regarding claims 5 and 19, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but the reference does not expressly disclose the positioning adhesive tape is strip-shaped and perpendicular to the interconnect wires, and the positioning adhesive tape spans across multiple parallel interconnect wires.
Kim discloses the use of positioning adhesive tape (150) that is arranged perpendicular to the interconnect wires (148) (see Figure 3).
As modified Cai is not limited to any specific examples of the arrangement of the adhesive tape on the interconnect wires and as positioning adhesive tape arranged perpendicular to the interconnect wires was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Kim above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the positioning adhesive tape in any suitable orientation, including perpendicular to the interconnect wires in the device of modified Cai. Said combination would amount to nothing more than the use of a known element for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before for the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the positioning adhesive tape to span across multiple parallel interconnect wires to hold them in place to save time in applying the positioning adhesive tape by reducing the number of tape segments that is needed.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 114023842; see English machine translation) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205) in view of Fu et al. (US 2014/0096823).
Regarding claim 8, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but the reference does not expressly disclose a number of auxiliary positioning grids per row is 15 to 35, and the auxiliary positioning grid has a width of 0.01 to 0.20 mm, and a height of 4 to 20 µm.
Fu discloses it is well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that an additional auxiliary electrode can have a width of 75 microns and only adds about 0.05% shading ([0045]) and a typical grid electrode has a height of less than 25 microns and a width between 100 and 120 microns ([0010]), such that high metal height to width aspect ratio is desired to reduce losses due to emitter resistance and shading ([0036]).
Therefore, as the resistive losses and shading are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said number of auxiliary positioning grids per row and the width and height of the auxiliary positioning grids, with said resistive losses and shading effects both changing as the number of auxiliary positioning grids per row and the width and height of the auxiliary positioning grids are adjusted, the precise auxiliary positioning grids per row and the width and height of the auxiliary positioning grids would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed number of auxiliary positioning grids per row and the width and height of the auxiliary positioning grids cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the number of auxiliary positioning grids per row and the width and height of the auxiliary positioning grids in the apparatus of modified Cai to obtain the desired balance between the resistive losses and shading effects (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 114023842; see English machine translation) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205) in view of Terashita et al. (US 2019/0393369).
Regarding claim 11, modified Cai discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the cell is a heterojunction cell, TOPCON cell, or a PERC cell ([0038]) and the cell is a thin-sheet cell (PERC cells are known to be thin film solar cells), but the reference does not expressly disclose the cell has a thickness range of 70 to 150 µm.
Terashita discloses a PERC cell can have a thickness of about 100 to 300 microns ([0027).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976);
In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii et al. (US 2017/0141253) in view of Chen et al. (CN 207651495; see English machine translation) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0295205).
Regarding claim 1, Ishii discloses a connection structure for cell and interconnect wires (see Figure 4), comprising a cell (11) and multiple parallel interconnect wires (21) arranged on the cell (see Figure 4), and further comprising a bonding mechanism (14) provided between the interconnect wires and the cell (the encapsulant fills up any space between the front and back substrates (12 and 13) to secure all the components in place, such that there is space between the interconnect wires and the cell outside of the connection locations; [0042]); and
the bonding mechanism wraps the interconnect wires from outer sides and then bonds to the cell, so as to fix the interconnect wires to the cell (as set forth above),
but the reference does not expressly disclose the connection structure for cell and interconnect wires further comprises fingers provided on the cell perpendicular to the interconnect wires, an end portion of the cell is provided with a reinforcing grid that is parallel to the fingers;
the reinforcing grid is located between two adjacent fingers and the reinforcing grid is located on an outer side of an outermost interconnect wire;
an inner end of the reinforcing grid is connected to a connecting grid that is vertical, and both ends of the connecting grid are connected to the fingers on both sides of the reinforcing grid; and
the cell is provided with an auxiliary positioning grid overlapping with an end of each interconnect wire for positioning the interconnect wires, wherein the auxiliary positioning grid is perpendicular to the fingers, and the auxiliary positioning grid is located on a front surface or a back surface of the cell and is provided only at a starting end of the interconnect wires.
Chen discloses a connection structure for cell (see Figure 1) comprising fingers (22) provided on the cell perpendicular to the busbar (21),
an end portion of the cell is provided with a reinforcing grid (221) that is parallel to the fingers (see Figure 3);
the reinforcing grid is located between two adjacent fingers (see Figure 3) and the reinforcing grid is located on an outer side of an outermost interconnect wire (area 11);
an inner end of the reinforcing grid is connected to a connecting grid that is vertical (21’), and both ends of the connecting grid are connected to the fingers on both sides of the reinforcing grid (see Figures 1 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated finger electrodes perpendicular to the interconnect wires and additional finger electrodes parallel to the fingers located between two adjacent fingers in the manner as described above in the device of Ishii, as taught by Chen, so that current collection on the surface of the cell can be efficiently transported and current collection and transmission capabilities can be improved in the edge region outside of the outermost busbar in order to maintain uniformity of current transmission, as taught by Chen ([0031]).
Lee discloses a connection structure for cell (see Figure 3) comprising an auxiliary positioning grid (350) for positioning the interconnect wires (370), wherein the auxiliary positioning grid is perpendicular to the fingers (320), and the auxiliary positioning grid is located on a front surface or a back surface of the cell and is provided only at a starting end of the interconnect wires (see Figure 4A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated an auxiliary positioning grid perpendicular to the fingers in the manner as described above in the device of modified Ishii, as taught by Lee, so that the arrangement of the interconnector can be guided and improve carrier collection efficiency ([0018]) as well as improving the cell cracking phenomenon by the interconnector and the weakening of the adhesion between the interconnector and the electrode ([0045]), as taught by Lee.
While modified Ishii does not expressly disclose the auxiliary positioning grid overlaps with an end of each interconnect wire, Lee discloses the interconnector 370 may be disposed between the edge collecting electrodes 350 in the edge area E ([0177]) but does not require the interconnector to be disposed between the edge collecting electrodes 350 in the edge area E.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the auxiliary positioning grid to be spaced apart such that the auxiliary positioning grid overlaps with an end of each interconnect wire, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art while the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Regarding claim 2, modified Ishii discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the bonding mechanism is a positioning adhesive tape (as set forth above, the encapsulant fixes the components within the module after lamination), and both sides of the positioning adhesive tape along a length direction adhere to the cell (as set forth above).
Regarding claim 7, modified Ishii discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the positioning adhesive tape is in a form of a whole block covering all interconnect wires (the encapsulant is in the form of a sheet; [0042]; see Figure 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited references do not disclose technical feature 2, specifically, Lee does not explicitly state the purpose of the interconnector 370 arrangement is for positioning the interconnector.
However, as set forth above, the rearrangement of the placement of the interconnector relative to the edge collecting electrodes 350 involves only routine skill in the art while the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device.
Additionally, it is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant. See, e.g., In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (motivation question arises in the context of the general problem confronting the inventor rather than the specific problem solved by the invention); Cross Med. Prods., Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1323, 76 USPQ2d 1662, 1685 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ("One of ordinary skill in the art need not see the identical problem addressed in a prior art reference to be motivated to apply its teachings."). See MPEP 2144 IV.
Further, Applicant repeatedly mentions amended independent claim 1 involves an inventive step over the references and that the claim can achieve beneficial technical effects over the prior art, which are metrics for determining patentability in other countries and for PCT filings and unrelated to US filings. It is unclear if Applicant is familiar with US patent rules and laws, such that Applicant is recommended to consult the MPEP for information.
Therefore, the arguments were not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA CHERN whose telephone number is (408)918-7559. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 AM-5:30 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/CHRISTINA CHERN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722