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 . This is a first action on the merits of the application.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Foreign priority is claimed in the Instant Application; EFD is 09/12/2023.
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.
Claim 7 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 regard(s) as the invention.
Claim 7 recites “R6 is butyl or propanol” in line 1 is indefinite. R6 is defined as a
substituent attached to the cyclic ammonium structure; however, “propanol” ordinarily denotes a neutral alcohol molecule and does not identify the atom through which that molecule is attached to the claimed cation. It is therefore unclear whether applicants intend, for example 1-hydroxypropyl, 2-hydropropyl, 3-hydroxypropyl, propoxy, or another propanol-derived substituent. The applicant is recommended to amend the claim to identify the intended substituent, such as hydroxypropyl, if supported by the Specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC§ 102
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)(l) 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for
patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Choi et al., (KR20100093960 A- English translated document, hereinafter as “Choi”).
Regarding claim 1, Choi teaches carbon dioxide absorbing composition comprising ionic material, specifically pyrrolidinium- and piperidinium-based ionic-liquid employed for CO2 absorption represented by the following Chemical Formula A below (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-45; chemical formula on page 3 of the original document). Choi discloses a CO2-absorbing butylmethypiperidinium [BMPiper] (dialkylpiperidinium) an ionic liquid comprising a saturated piperidinium cyclic ammonium cation (p. 2, lines 33-45) (a cyclic ammonium cation represented by the following Chemical Formula 1):
[Claim 1: Chemical Formula 1]
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
dialkylpiperidinium [Choi: Chemical Formula A]
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein
L1= single bond, i.e., the direct bond joining the two left-side ring carbons of the
piperidinium ring (L1 is a single bond, -O-, -NR7-, or (C1-C8) alkylene),
instant R1-R4 = H, corresponding to the unsubstituted piperidinium ring-carbon positions
(R1 to R4 are each independently of one another hydrogen or (C1-C10) alkyl), and
instant R5 and R6 = butyl and methyl, corresponding to Choi’s R1 and R2 nitrogen substituents in butylmethypiperidinium attached to the quaternary ring nitrogen; each is C1-C20 alkyl (R5 to R7 are each independently of one another (C1-C10) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C10) alkyl).
R7 is not implicated because the selected instant L=1 single bond alternative is relied upon rather than L1= -NR7-
In regard to claim 2, Choi discloses the carbon absorbing composition as discussed in claim 1, wherein a saturated piperidinium cyclic quaternary ammonium cation represented by the following Chemical Formula B below (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-38; chemical formula on page 3 of the original document), wherein Choi discloses a CO2-absorbing butylmethypiperidinium [BMPiper] (dialkylpiperidinium) a ionic liquid comprising a saturated piperidinium cyclic ammonium cation (p. 2, lines 33-45 )(wherein the cyclic ammonium cation is represented by the following Chemical Formula 2):
[Claim 2: Chemical Formula 2]
PNG
media_image3.png
200
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
dialkylpiperidinium [Choi: Chemical Formula B]
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein
L1= single bond, i.e., the direct bond joining the two left-side ring carbons of the
piperidinium ring (L1 is a single bond, -O-, -NR7-, or (C1-C8) alkylene),
instant R1-R4 = H, corresponding to the unsubstituted piperidinium ring-carbon positions
(R1 to R4 are each independently of one another hydrogen or (C1-C10) alkyl), and
instant R5 and R6 = butyl and methyl, corresponding to Choi’s R1 and R2 nitrogen substituents in butylmethypiperidinium attached to the quaternary ring nitrogen; each is C1-C10 alkyl (R5 to R7 are each independently of one another (C1-C10) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C10) alkyl).
R7 is not implicated because the selected instant L=1 single bond alternative is relied upon rather than L1= -NR7-
In regard to claim 3, Choi discloses the carbon absorbing composition as discussed in claim 2 (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-38; chemical formula on page 3 of the original document), wherein L1= single bond, i.e., the direct bond joining the two left-side ring carbons of the piperidinium ring (L1 is a single bond, -O-, -NR7-, or (C1-C8) alkylene),
Instant R5 and R6 = butyl and methyl, corresponding to Choi’s R1 and R2 nitrogen substituents in butylmethypiperidinium attached to the quaternary ring nitrogen; each is C1-C5 alkyl (R5 to R7 are each independently of one another (C1-C5) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C5) alkyl).
R7 is not implicated because the selected instant L=1 single bond alternative is relied upon rather than L1= -NR7-
In regard to claim 4, Choi discloses the carbon absorbing composition as discussed in claim 2 (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-38; chemical formulas on page 3 of the original document), wherein L1= single bond, i.e., the direct bond joining the two left-side ring carbons of the piperidinium ring (L1 is a single bond, -O-, -NR7-, or (C1-C8) alkylene),
Instant R5 and R6 = butyl and methyl, corresponding to Choi’s R1 and R2 nitrogen substituents in butylmethypiperidinium attached to the quaternary ring nitrogen; each is C1-C5 alkyl (R5 to R7 are each independently of one another (C1-C5) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C5) alkyl).
R7 is not implicated because the selected instant L=1 single bond alternative is relied upon rather than L1= -NR7-
In regard to claim 11, Choi teaches the performance results corresponding to 0.802 mol CO2/mol ionic liquid for a disclosed piperidinium ionic liquid, which meets the limitation (p. 4, lines 50-51; Table 3 on page 15 of the original document), wherein the carbon dioxide absorption equivalent is 0.6 or more.
Regarding claim 12, Choi teaches carbon dioxide absorbing composition of claim wherein the carbon dioxide absorbing composition further comprises one or more amine absorbents (i.e., amine sorbents) (p. 1, lines 43-44; p. 2, line 59 thru p. 3, line 1).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Choi.
In regard to claim 17, Choi teaches a CO2 absorption/desorption separation process using a cyclic ammonium ionic liquid (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18). Choi discloses a method of separating carbon dioxide, the method comprising:
contacting CO2 with pyrrolidinium/piperidinium ionic liquid absorbent to load the ionic liquid with CO2 (p. 4, lines 16-22) (a first step of bringing the carbon dioxide absorbing composition of claim 1 into contact with a mixture comprising carbon dioxide); and
heating/degassing the loaded ionic liquid to release CO2 and regenerate the absorbent (p. 1, lines 43-46; p. 3, lines 34-37) (a second step of heat treating the carbon dioxide absorbing composition to desorb carbon dioxide attached to the absorbing composition).
In regard to claim 18, Choi teaches CO2 absorption at 20-50oC (p. 3, line 46) which lies within the claimed 20-80oC range and therefore anticipates the claimed temperature range.
In regard to claim 19, Choi thermal degassing at approximately 70oC (p. 3, line 60 thru p. 4, line 2), where the disclosed 70oC point lies within the claimed 70-150oC range and therefore anticipates the claimed temperature range.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 5-6 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi, as applied to claim 1, in view of Saptal et al., (Bifunctional Ionic Liquids for the Multitask Fixation of Carbon Dioxide into Valuable Chemicals, ChemCatChem, 2016, 8, pp. 244-250, hereinafter as “Saptal”).
Regarding claim 5, Choi teaches cyclic ammonium ionic-liquid CO2 absorbents but does not disclose wherein the cyclic ammonium cation is represented by the following Chemical Formula 3:
However, Saptal teaches bifunctional 1,4-diazabicyclo[2.2.2]octane (DABCO)-based ionic liquids in CO2 chemistry and discloses a quaternized DABCO cation represented by the following Chemical Formula C below (p. 249, Synthesis of ionic liquids section, left column, lines 1-11; Fig. 1 – structures of DABCO and polymer supported ionic liquids used as catalysts) (wherein the cyclic ammonium cation is represented by the following Chemical Formula 3):
[Claim 5: Chemical Formula 3]
PNG
media_image4.png
200
400
media_image4.png
Greyscale
DABCO [Saptal: Fig. 1: Chemical Formula C] (not including substituent, X-)
PNG
media_image5.png
200
400
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein
L2 =ethylene, -CH2CH2-, bridges between the DABCO nitrogens (L2 is (C1-C10)
alkylene),
R1-R4 = H at the unsubstituted DABCO charge-carbon positions (R1 to R4 are each
independently of one another hydrogen or (C1-C5) alkyl),
and
an N-bound lower hydroxyalkyl substituent on the quaternized DABCO nitrogen (R6 is
(C1-C10) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C10) alkyl).
Choi and Saptal are analogous arts because both concern ionic materials selected for interaction with CO2.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute Saptal’s DABCO cyclic-ammonium scaffold for Choi’s cyclic ammonium scaffold because DABCO-based ionic liquids as tunable ionic structures are useful in CO2 chemistry provides a predictable alternative cyclic-ammonium cation with catalytic applications for the fixation of carbon dioxide into valuable chemicals under mild reaction conditions (Saptal: p. 244, Introduction section, right column, second paragraph, lines 1-8).
In regard to claim 6, Choi, in view of Saptal, teaches the carbon dioxide absorbing composition of claim 5. Saptal further teaches DABCO composition (p. 249, Synthesis of ionic liquids section, left column, lines 1-11; Fig. 1 – structures of DABCO and polymer supported ionic liquids used as catalysts):
wherein
ethylene, C2 alkylene (L2 is (C1-C5) alkylene),
R1-R4= H (R1 to R4 are each independently of one another hydrogen or (C1-C3) alkyl, and
a lower hydroxyalkyl N-substituent within the claimed range (R6 is (C1-C5) alkyl or hydroxy(C1-C5) alkyl).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi in view of Saptal, as applied to claim 5, and further in view of Liu et al., (A facile and efficient procedure for one-pot four-component synthesis of polysubstituted spiro pyrano[2,3-c]pyrazole and spiro 1,4-dihydropyridine catalyzed by a DABCO-based ionic liquid under mild conditions, New J. Chem., 2018, 42, pp. 1046-1051, hereinafter as “Liu”).
Regarding claim 7, Choi, in view of Saptal, teaches the claimed DABCO scaffold but does not disclose R6 is butyl or propanol.
Liu teaches a simple and efficient synthetic protocol for the syntheses of spiro pyrano[2,3-c]pyrazole and spiro 1,4-dihydropyridine derivatives via a one pot four-component reaction catalyzed by DABCO-based ionic liquids (p. 1047, Results and Discussion section, first paragraph, lines 1-2, Fig. 1 shows structures of DABCO-based ionic liquid catalysts) and further teaches 1-butyl-1,4-diazabicyclo[2.2.2.]octan-1-ium chloride [(DABCO-C4]Cl) (Chemical Formula F) (p. 1047, Table 1 showing reaction conditions of the different catalysts). Liu discloses:
DABCO [Liu: Fig.1: Chemical Formula F]
PNG
media_image6.png
221
464
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein the DABCO N-CH2CH2-N bridge (L2 is ethylene),
the unsubstituted DABCO cage carbon positions, R1-R4 =H (R1 to R4 are hydrogen), and
R6= is butyl directly attached to the quaternized DABCO nitrogen in Liu’s disclosed DABCO composition [(DABCO-C4]Cl), Table 1) (R6 is butyl or propanol).
Choi, Saptal and Liu are analogous arts because both Choi and Saptal concern ionic liquid materials selected for interaction with CO2 and Liu is pertinent art because it establishes N-propyl-DABCO member of the same cation class.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Liu’s butyl DABCO species in Choi-Saptal’s DABCO ionic-liquid composition because the butyl substitution as a known member of the same quaternized DABCO class in order to drive appropriate reaction condition of the ionic liquid catalyst (Liu: p. 1047, Results and Discussion section, second paragraph, lines 1-4).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi, as applied to claim 1, in view of Seo et al., (Physical Properties and CO2 Reaction Pathway of 1-Ethyl-3-Methylimidazolium Ionic Liquids with Aprotic Heterocyclic Anions, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2014, 118, pp. 14870−14879, hereinafter as “Seo”).
Regarding claim 8, Choi teaches the carbon dioxide absorbing composition of claim 1 but does not teach wherein the ionic material further comprises a phenolate-based anion represented by the following Chemical Formula 4 and/or an imidazolate-based anion represented by the following Chemical Formula 5:
[Claim 8: Chemical Formula 5]
PNG
media_image7.png
200
400
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, Seo teaches an imidazolide/imidazolate anion having an anionic nitrogen site represented by the following Chemical Formula E (Abstract; Fig. 6 showing imidazolate anion involved in the carbon dioxide absorption; p. 14875, left column line 2 thru p. 14876 left column, line 2):
imidazolate anion [Seo: Fig. 1: Chemical Formula E (box)]
[AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image8.png
200
400
media_image8.png
Greyscale
wherein
the carbon and nitrogen atoms defining the imidazolate ring (A1 to A4 are independently of one another CR or N),
the additional imidazole ring nitrogen (at least one of A1 to A4 is N, and
R is hydrogen (the unsubstituted imidazolide embodiment, R=H).
Choi and Seo are analogous arts because both concern ionic-liquid materials for CO2 capture.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Seo’s imidazole anion in in Choi’s cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid because imidazole anion is chemically tunable and have relatively low viscosities and melting points (Seo: p. 14870, Introduction section, right column, second paragraph, lines 11-14).
In regard to claim 9, Seo teaches an ionic aprotic heterocyclic anion (AHA) ionic liquid/CO2 system evaluated in the presence of water (p. 14872, left column, first paragraph, lines 2-14).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi in view of Seo, as applied to claim 9, and further in view of Gurkan et al., (Reaction kinetics of CO2 absorption into phosphonium based anion-functionalized ionic liquids, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2013, 15, pp. 7796-7811, hereinafter as “Gurkan”).
Regarding claim 10, Choi, in view of Seo, does not teach wherein the carbon dioxide absorbing composition further comprises one or more solvents other than water.
However, Gurkan teaches tetraglyme, a non-reactive, low volatility molecular solvent used to dilute reactive ionic liquids (Abstract; p. 7798, right column, second paragraph, lines 8-10); Gurkan employs 0.052, 0.10 and 0.15 M reactive ionic liquids in tetraglyme (p. 7799, left column, first paragraph, lines 2-6).
Choi, Seo and Gurkan are analogous arts because all concern ionic-liquid media for CO2 absorption/separation. Gurkan is particularly pertinent to the solvent component of such reactive ionic-liquid media.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Gurkan’s tetraglyme in Choi/Seo’s cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid because that tetraglyme has substantially lower viscosity than the near ionic liquid reducing viscosity of the CO2 absorption medium (Gurkan: Abstract; p. 7797, right column, second paragraph, lines 9-11).
Claims 13 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi, as applied to claim 12, in view of Seo.
Regarding claim 13, Choi teaches carbon dioxide absorbing composition of claim 1, wherein the carbon dioxide absorbing composition further comprises one or more amine absorbents but does not teach wherein the carbon dioxide absorbing composition further comprises water.
However, Seo teaches an ionic aprotic heterocyclic anion (AHA) ionic-liquid/CO2 system evaluated in the presence of water (p. 14872, left column, first paragraph, lines 2-14).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Seo’s imidazole anion evaluation of water presence in Choi’s cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid because the presence of water decreases CO2 solubility due to its inhibiting effect, which needs to be considered when developing ionic liquids for CO2 capture (Seo: p. 14877, Conclusion section, lines 27-31).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi in view of Seo, as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Gurkan
Regarding claim 14, Choi, in view of Seo, does not teach wherein the carbon dioxide absorbing composition further comprises one or more solvents other than water.
However, Gurkan teaches tetraglyme, a non-reactive, low volatility molecular solvent used to dilute reactive ionic liquids (Abstract; p. 7798, right column, second paragraph, lines 8-10); Gurkan employs 0.052, 0.10 and 0.15 M reactive ionic liquids in tetraglyme (p. 7799, left column, first paragraph, lines 2-6).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Gurkan’s tetraglyme in Choi/Seo’s cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid because that tetraglyme has substantially lower viscosity than the near ionic liquid reducing viscosity of the CO2 absorption medium (Gurkan: Abstract; p. 7797, right column, second paragraph, lines 9-11).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi in view of Seo.
Regarding claim 15, Choi teaches a method of contacting CO2 with a cyclic-ammonium ionic-liquid absorbent; a piperidinium cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid (in an ionic material with a cyclic ammonium cation) (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-38; chemical formula on page 3 of the original document): a method of absorbing carbon dioxide comprising:
physical absorption /dissolution of CO2 in the ionic-liquid phase (Abstract; p. 1, lines 11-18; p. 2, lines 33-38; chemical formulas on page 3 of the original document) (additionally physically absorbing carbon dioxide in the carbon dioxide absorbing composition comprising the ionic material).
But Choi does not disclose reacting carbon dioxide and a phenolate-based anion and/or an imidazolate-based anion to respectively form a carbonate or a carbamate.
However, Seo teaches a chemical reaction of CO2 with an imidazolate/imidazolide aprotic heterocyclic anion (reacting carbon dioxide and an imidazolate-based anion to form the corresponding N-CO2-bound imidazolate reaction product (to form a carbamate) (Abstract; p. 14876, left column, second paragraph, lines 1-5).
Choi and Seo are analogous arts because each concerns ionic-liquid CO2 capture.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ Seo’s reactive imidazolide/imidazolate anion to form carbamate in Choi’s cyclic-ammonium ionic liquid because the formation of the intermolecular hydrogen-bond network between the carbamate on the anion and the water molecules increased the viscosity significantly (Seo: p. 14877, left column, second paragraph, lines 13-16).
In regard to claim 16, Choi, in view of Seo, teaches the method of absorbing carbon dioxide of claim 15, wherein reacting carbon dioxide involves the cyclic ammonium cation to form the ionic material by following Reaction Formula 2 to form the carbamate (Abstract; p. 14876, left column, second paragraph, lines 1-5).
Claims 20 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatented over Choi, as applied to claim 17, in view of in view of Baugh et al., (US 2012/0063978 A1, hereinafter as “Baugh”).
Regarding claim 20, Choi teaches an absorption followed by degassing/desorption cycle and repetition of the absorption/degassing process approximately ten times while maintaining CO2 absorption capacity (p. 4, lines 16-22; p. 1, lines 43-46; p. 3, lines 34-37) (wherein when the first step and the second step are a unit process).
But Choi does not teach the carbon dioxide is continuously separated by repeating the unit process twice or more.
However, Baugh teaches a continuous cyclic absorption-desorption process in which CO2-rich absorbent is regenerated and the regenerated lean solution is cycled back to the sorption zone (Abstract; ¶ [0018]).
Choi and Baugh are analogous arts because both concern usable liquid CO2 absorption/regeneration processes.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to operate Choi’s repeatedly regenerable ionic-liquid absorption/desorption sequence as Baugh’s continuous cyclic process because recycle of regenerated absorbent to the sorption zone permit continuous repeated CO2 separation using the same liquid sorbent providing a low energy CO2 capture process (Baugh: ¶¶ [0012, 0018]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Wilson Mendoza whose telephone number is (571) 272-8443. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 9:00 AM until 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, an applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview request at http://www.uspto.gov.intwerviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or processing is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or processing is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through private PAIR only. For more information about PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have any questions on access to the private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Serv ice Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILSON GALLARDO MENDOZA/Examiner, Art Unit 1772
/JONATHAN MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights