CTNF 18/875,174 CTNF 99123 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/12/2025 and 12/16/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the Examiner. Drawings 06-22-07 AIA The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Fig. 4 – 405, 406, 408, 409. Fig. 6 – 602, 604. Fig. 10 – 1006, 1007. Fig. 11 – 1112 . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 06-36-01 AIA Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1, 3-8, and 10-22 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1: “first substrate” should read “first silicon substrate”. Claim 1: “second substrate” should read “second silicon substrate”. Claim 3 (line 3): “silicon e ” should read “silicon” . Appropriate correction is required. Claims 4-8, 10-22 are objected to due to their dependency on claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 14-17 are 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 14 recites the limitation "each of the plurality of first reflectors and the plurality of second reflectors…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 recites the limitation “the plurality of first reflectors”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16 recites the limitation “the plurality of first reflectors”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 recites the limitation “the plurality of first reflectors”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 6, 7, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by IDS document Dogiamis et al. (US 2020/0280121; “Dogiamis” or “D”) . Claim 1 : Dogiamis discloses (fig. 1 below) “A wireless chip-to-chip device (abstract), comprising: a first silicon substrate (die 130) comprising a first antenna (¶32, “The signal launchers 160 may be considered to be RF radiative elements that are configured to emit (i.e., transmit) an electromagnetic signal from the dies 130/135.”) , configured to emit a radiofrequency signal (¶32, “The electromagnetic signal may be, for example, a mmWave signal with a frequency between approximately 20 GHz and 300 GHz. In other embodiments, the electromagnetic signal may have a frequency greater or less than the mmWave range”) ; a second silicon substrate (die 135) comprising a second antenna (160) , configured to receive the radiofrequency signal (¶32, “The electromagnetic signals are depicted in FIG. 1 as the lateral dashed and arrowed lines passing through the waveguide 125”) ; and a waveguide (125) , positioned between the first silicon substrate and the second silicon substrate. PNG media_image1.png 423 577 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim 6 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D discloses “wherein an exterior portion of the waveguide (125) comprises a metallic layer (¶39, “Generally, the waveguide may be clad directly (e.g., by application of a cladding material over the waveguide faces) by a metallic material such as aluminum, steel, copper, iron,”) ”. Claim 7 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D discloses “wherein an interior portion of the waveguide comprises a dielectric material (¶39, “the waveguide 125 may be a “dielectric-only” type of waveguide, i.e., without a metallic cladding element.”) ”. Claim 20 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D discloses “a metal layer on the waveguide (¶39, “Generally, the waveguide may be clad directly (e.g., by application of a cladding material over the waveguide faces) by a metallic material such as aluminum, steel, copper, iron,”) ” . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis et al. (US 2020/0280121; “Dogiamis” or “D”) . Claim 3: Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. Dogiamis discloses, in the embodiment of fig. 1 (“first embodiment”) “a second gap (at 155) between the second silicon substrate (135) and the waveguide (125) ”. D does not disclose, in the embodiment of fig. 1, a first gap between the first silicon substrate and the waveguide. However, D teaches (¶41) “In embodiments where the waveguide 125 is not touching a die 130 or 135 ….”. D therefore teaches a first gap between the first silicon substrate and the waveguide. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide a first gap between the first silicon substrate and the waveguide in the first embodiment of Dogiamis, as taught by Dogiamis. Doing so allows for, for example, an airgap between the chip and the waveguide which reduces parasitic capacitance therebetween . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis in view of Fuller (US 2024/0025143) . Claim 4: Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 3. Dogiamis does not disclose “further comprising a first magneto-dielectric material in the first gap; and a second magneto-dielectric material in the second gap”. Fuller teaches a magneto-dielectric material for use in antenna and waveguide systems (abstract and ¶48). Fuller also teaches (¶59) that a magneto-dielectric material may be positioned over, or may surround an antenna, such that the energy of the antenna can be focused. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a magneto-dielectric material could be used in the first and second gaps between the first and second antennas and the waveguide, in order to focus the em beam from the first antenna into the waveguide, and from the waveguide to the second antenna. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the Dogiamis device to further comprise a first magneto-dielectric material in the first gap; and a second magneto-dielectric material in the second gap, as taught by Fuller. Doing so allows for the em radiation to be focused without the use of additional reflecting components, thereby reducing the overall size of the wireless chip-to-chip device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5, 8, 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis in view of IDS document Herbsommer et al. (US 2014/0287703; “Herbsommer” or “H”) . Claim 5 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D does not disclose “wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are polarized along an axis that is perpendicular to an axis through the first silicon substrate, the waveguide, and the second silicon substrate”. However, D does disclose (¶35) that the signal launch/antenna (160) may be “a Vivaldi antenna, a broadband microstrip-to-tapered slot transition, a horn-like launcher structure, a leaky-wave antenna or some other type of electromagnetic radiative structure”. Herbsommer teaches (fig. 2A) an integrated circuit with antenna for a dielectric waveguide and chip to chip interconnection using a dielectric waveguide (¶41). H teaches (¶39) “the most common kind of waveguide is one that has a rectangular cross-section, one that is usually not square. These are useful for carrying electromagnetic waves that are horizontally or vertically polarized”. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the polarization of a waveguide must match the polarization of the antenna feed, in order to maximize power transfer and avoid signal degradation. Therefore, a vertically polarized antenna is required for a waveguide with vertical polarization. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis wherein the first antenna and the second antenna are polarized along an axis that is perpendicular to an axis through the first silicon substrate, the waveguide, and the second silicon substrate, as taught by H. Doing so allows for maximum power transfer between the antennas and the waveguide. Claim 8 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D does not disclose “wherein the first silicon substrate further comprises a plurality of first reflectors; wherein at least one of the plurality of first reflectors is positioned opposite the waveguide relative to the first antenna; and wherein the plurality of first reflectors is a plurality of vias”. H teaches (fig. 8A below) a reflector structure 818 formed in a carrier substrate adjacent to a dipole antenna 812 and opposite the interface 811 with waveguide 820 (¶59). H teaches (¶53) “A reflector on the backside of the dipole antenna will reflect the radiation radiated towards the center of the package back in the direction of the dielectric waveguide”. The reflector can comprise a horizontal ground plane portion, and an array of vertical metallized vias (¶57) (see fig. 5). PNG media_image2.png 223 493 media_image2.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis wherein the first silicon substrate further comprises a plurality of first reflectors; wherein at least one of the plurality of first reflectors is positioned opposite the waveguide relative to the first antenna; and wherein the plurality of first reflectors is a plurality of vias, as taught by H. Doing so provides essentially a vertical metallic “wall” that reflects radiated energy from a dipole antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H). Claim 10 : the modified Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 8. The modified Dogiamis teaches “wherein the plurality of first reflectors is arranged to reflect a radiofrequency signal of the first antenna toward the waveguide (¶57)”. Claim 11 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D does not disclose “wherein the second silicon substrate further comprises a plurality of second reflectors; wherein at least one of the second reflectors is positioned opposite the waveguide relative to the second antenna”. However, D discloses that the first and second antennas may be configured to emit or receive an RF signal (see dashed arrows of fig. 1, and ¶33). H teaches (¶61) “a reflector structure in combination with a dipole antenna provides a good way to launch or receive sub-terahertz signals that are generated or received by an integrated circuit”. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the reflector structure taught by H could be used in the second silicon substrate to reflect signals from the second antenna towards the waveguide. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis wherein the second silicon substrate further comprises a plurality of second reflectors; wherein at least one of the second reflectors is positioned opposite the waveguide relative to the second antenna, as taught by H. Doing so provides a means for reflecting radiated energy from a dipole antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H). Claim 12 : the modified Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 11. D does not disclose, but H teaches “wherein the plurality of second reflectors is a plurality of vias (¶57 and fig. 8A)”. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis in view of Herbsommer, wherein the plurality of second reflectors is a plurality of vias, as taught by H. Doing so provides essentially a vertical metallic “wall” that reflects radiated energy from a dipole antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H). Claim 13 : the modified Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 11. The modified D teaches “wherein the plurality of second reflectors is arranged to reflect a radiofrequency signal of the second antenna toward the waveguide (¶57)”. Claim 14 : Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 7. Dogiamis does not disclose “wherein each of the plurality of first reflectors and the plurality of second reflectors is arranged along an axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the waveguide”. H teaches (fig. 2A below) “wherein each of the plurality of first reflectors 214 (see multiple vertical vias connected to first reflector 214) is arranged along an axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the waveguide 220”. Although fig. 2A does not show the plurality of second reflectors similarly arranged, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the reflector structure taught by H could be used in the second silicon substrate to reflect signals from the second antenna towards the waveguide. PNG media_image3.png 175 622 media_image3.png Greyscale It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis wherein each of the plurality of first reflectors and the plurality of second reflectors is arranged along an axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the waveguide, as taught by H. Doing so provides essentially a vertical metallic “wall” that reflects radiated energy from an antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H). Claim 15 : Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 7. D does not disclose, but H teaches (annotated fig. 5 below) “wherein the plurality of first reflectors 514 comprises a first subgroup S1 of first reflectors and a second subgroup S2 of first reflectors; wherein the first subgroup S1 of first reflectors is arranged along a first axis; wherein the second subgroup S2 of first reflectors is arranged along a second axis; and wherein each of the first axis and the second axis are at an angle of equal to or fewer than 90 degrees relative to a longitudinal axis L1 of the waveguide 520”. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis, wherein the plurality of first reflectors comprises a first subgroup of first reflectors and a second subgroup of first reflectors; wherein the first subgroup of first reflectors is arranged along a first axis; wherein the second subgroup of first reflectors is arranged along a second axis; and wherein each of the first axis and the second axis are at an angle of equal to or fewer than 90 degrees relative to a longitudinal axis of the waveguide, as taught by H. Doing so provides essentially a vertical metallic “wall” that reflects radiated energy from an antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H) in a desired radiation pattern. PNG media_image4.png 374 580 media_image4.png Greyscale Claim 16 : Dogiamis teaches the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 7. D does not disclose, but H teaches (annotated fig. 5 below) “wherein the plurality of first reflectors 514 comprises a first subgroup S1 of first reflectors, a second subgroup S2 of first reflectors, and a third subgroup S3 of first reflectors; wherein the first subgroup S1 of first reflectors is arranged along a first axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis L1 of the waveguide 520; and wherein the second subgroup S2 of first reflectors and the third subgroup S3 of first reflectors are each arranged along axes parallel to the longitudinal axis L1 of the waveguide 520”. PNG media_image5.png 444 632 media_image5.png Greyscale It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis, wherein the plurality of first reflectors comprises a first subgroup of first reflectors, a second subgroup of first reflectors, and a third subgroup of first reflectors; wherein the first subgroup of first reflectors is arranged along a first axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the waveguide; and wherein the second subgroup of first reflectors and the third subgroup of first reflectors are each arranged along axes parallel to the longitudinal axis of the waveguide, as taught by H. Doing so provides essentially a vertical metallic “wall” that reflects radiated energy from an antenna back towards the waveguide (¶57 of H) in a desired radiation pattern . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis in view of Elsherbini et al. (US 2018/0212306; “Elsherbini” or “E”) . Claim 18 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D discloses (fig. 1), “further comprising a third silicon substrate 150 above the second silicon substrate 135/145, wherein the waveguide 125 has a first opening adjacent to the first substrate 130/145, a second opening adjacent to the second substrate 135/145” (¶37, “the waveguide 125 may be viewed to have at least three channels, through which the three electromagnetic signals launched from signal launchers 160 may propagate.”). E teaches wireless interconnects in a package (abstract). E also teaches that the package substrate comprises multiple layers and that “antennas are placed in different positions within the layers of a package substrate 202 ” (¶33 and fig. 2 below). Para. [0035] of E further teaches “one antenna 222 is in a layer near the top side of the substrate and another antenna 224 is embedded within the substrate”. PNG media_image6.png 262 420 media_image6.png Greyscale Although D does not disclose “wherein the waveguide has a third opening adjacent to the third substrate”, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that each of the waveguide openings to the channels align with each respective antenna 160, and therefore any antennas formed in additional substrates or substrate layers would require an additional opening in order to transfer the em signal from the waveguide to the receiving antenna. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of D, wherein the waveguide has a third opening adjacent to the third substrate, as taught by D and E. Doing so allows for antenna formed in different substrate layers or substrates to be aligned with channels in a waveguide in order to provide a wireless interconnection . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis in view of Clark et al. (US 2017/0294942; “Clark”) . Claim 19: Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. Dogiamis does not disclose “further comprising one or more electrically conductive connections between the first silicon substrate and the second silicon substrate”. Clark teaches (fig. 11A) a system constructed using wired connections between components including antennas and processors. Clark also teaches (fig. 11B) a system constructed without the use of wired connections, using wireless communication. Clark further teaches (¶61) “a connection can include wired and wireless features. In one example, wireless transmission of energy and/or data can be used. If wireless transmission fails, then wired transmission can be used as a backup”. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dogiamis to include one or more electrically conductive connections between the first silicon substrate and the second silicon substrate, as taught by Clark. Doing so allows for backup wired transmission of energy/data if wireless transmission fails, or if additional bandwidth is required . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis in view of Vincent et al. (US 2021/0183797; “Vincent”) . Claim 21 : Dogiamis discloses the wireless chip-to-chip device of claim 1. D does not disclose “further comprising a groove on an exterior surface of the waveguide”. PNG media_image7.png 428 490 media_image7.png Greyscale Vincent teaches (fig. 3A above) a combined waveguide/heatsink structure (350/370) for an integrated circuit package. The bottom surface of the waveguide comprises a groove (formed between fins 375). It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of D to include a groove on an exterior surface of the waveguide, as taught by Vincent. Doing so allows for thermal dissipation of the generated heat while maintaining good radio frequency performance of the waveguide (abstract of Vincent) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogiamis et al. (US 2020/0280121 – of record; “Dogiamis” or “D”) in view of Mihota et al. (US 2011/0038282; “Mihota”) . Claim 22: Dogiamis discloses a first wireless chip-to-chip device according to claim 1. Dogimis does not explicitly disclose “a multichip package comprising, a first wireless chip-to-chip device according to claim 1, and a second wireless chip-to-chip device according to claim 1”. Mihota teaches a wireless chip-to-chip device (fig. 10 and ¶184) comprising a first antenna (136) configured to emit an RF signal (“millimeter wave”, abstract) , a second antenna (236) configured to receive the RF signal (¶12, “plurality of systems of millimeter wave signal transmission lines capable of individually transmitting information in a millimeter waveband independently of each other are provided. A sending section and a reception section are disposed on one end side and the other end side of each of the plural systems of millimeter wave signal transmission lines.”) ; and a waveguide (9) , positioned between the first substrate and the second substrate. Mihota also teaches a multichip package (¶285, “In the fifth example, a mechanism of the space division millimeter wave transmission structure of the present embodiment is applied to signal transmission between a plurality of semiconductor chips in one semiconductor package. In particular, a sheath, (for example, of a molded resin) of a semiconductor package is regarded as a housing, and a plurality of systems of millimeter wave signal transmission lines 9 which are independent of each other are constructed between a plurality of semiconductor chips in the same housing. More particularly, the fifth example is characterized in that, in one semiconductor package 20 j , a plurality of semiconductor chips 103 are disposed on a board and millimeter wave transmission is carried out between the semiconductor chips 103. In particular, millimeter wave transmission is carried out between the semiconductor chips 103 although they are in the same package, and the semiconductor package 20 j itself configures a millimeter wave in-dielectric transmission apparatus.”) . It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Mihota to provide a first wireless chip-to-chip device and a second wireless chip-to-chip device in a multichip package. Doing so allows for the transmission of more data than via the use of a single chip-to-chip device . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The pertinent prior art, as a whole, or in combination, cannot be reasonably construed as adequately teaching or suggesting the elements and features of the claimed invention(s) as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant . Dogiamis et al. (US 2020/0280121 – of record; “Dogiamis” or “D”) discloses (annotated fig. 5 below) wherein the plurality of first reflectors (514) comprises a first subgroup (S1) of first reflectors, a second subgroup (S2) of first reflectors, and a third subgroup (S3) of first reflectors; wherein the first subgroup (S1) of first reflectors is arranged along a first axis perpendicular to a longitudinal axis (L1) of the waveguide 520. Dogiamis does not teach, or suggest, wherein each of the second subgroup of first reflectors and the third subgroup of first reflectors arc arranged along a curve, such that a distance between a reflector of the second subgroup of first reflectors or the third subgroup of first reflectors and a longitudinal axis of the waveguide increases as a distance between the reflector and the waveguide decreases. PNG media_image5.png 444 632 media_image5.png Greyscale Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA N HAMADYK whose telephone number is (703)756-1672. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at (571) 270-7893. 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. /DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845 /ANNA N HAMADYK/Examiner, Art Unit 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 2 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 3 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 4 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 5 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 6 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 7 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 8 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 9 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 10 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 11 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 12 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 13 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 14 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 15 Art Unit: 2845 Application/Control Number: 18/875,174 Page 16 Art Unit: 2845
Prosecution Insights