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 Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
the word “bonding” should be deleted in the second line of the third paragraph of the claim as follows:
“a second bond layer formed at the lower main face of the core layer and configured to bond the hybrid bond sheet to a heat sink”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities:
“…the first bond layer … and the second bond layer” should be “…a first bond layer … and a second bond layer”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan) in view of Yoon; Jeong-Won et al. (US 2015/0115452; hereinafter Yoon), with reference to Nikitin; Ivan et al. (US 2020/0183056; hereinafter Nikitin).
Regarding claim 1, Viswanathan discloses a hybrid bond sheet configured to mount a semiconductor power module (20; Fig 4; ¶ [0012-13) to a heat sink (52; Fig 4; ¶ [0052]), the hybrid bond sheet comprising:
a thermally conductive core layer (40; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) having an upper main face (42; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) and a lower main face (44; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) opposing the upper main face;
a first bond layer formed (38/70; Figs 1,4; ¶ [0015,0036]) at the upper main face of the core layer and configured to bond the hybrid bond sheet to a semiconductor power module;
wherein the core layer is subdivided into a plurality of core metal sections (46; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016-17]) and second core sections (printed circuit board {PCB} 40; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) which are formed side-by-side between the upper main face and the lower main face (as shown in Fig 4), and the plurality of subdivided core metal sections is configured to enable a uniform heat transfer between the semiconductor power module and the heat sink and to reduce thermal stress at interfaces between the hybrid bond sheet and the heat sink (¶ [0017]).
Viswanathan discloses the core layer 40 may be adhered or otherwise fastened to heat sink 52 but does not disclose a second bond layer formed at the lower main face of the core layer and configured to bond the hybrid bond sheet to a heat sink.
In the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses a semiconductor device package comprising a semiconductor power module (SC11,M11; Fig 13; ¶ [00112-113) attached to a bond sheet (SUB11, comprising a PCB; Fig 13; ¶ [0111]) by a first bond layer (B11; Fig 13; ¶ [0114]), and a heat sink (BP100; Fig 13; ¶ [0116]) attached to the bond sheet SUB11 by a second bond layer (B100; Fig 13; ¶ [0116]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have combined the second bond layer of Yoon with the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan to arrive at the limitations of claim 1. One would have been motivated to do this as means of fastening the heat sink to the core layer. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because of the similar stacked structure of Yoon and Viswanathan comprising similar components, and because such a bond layer is well known in the art.
Viswanathan also does not disclose the second core sections are core polymer sections; however, this would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art because the term PCB implies a polymer composition, at least in the form of a resin material or as an encapsulation material. As reference, see printed circuit board 306 of Nikitin (¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 2, Viswanathan in view of Yoon, discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of core polymer sections is further configured to form a core polymer grid that is subdividing the core metal sections into core metal islands (As shown in Figs 2,4 of Viswanathan, core polymer sections 40 alternate across the page with core metal sections 46. Because Viswanathan discloses that core metal sections are cylinders or columns, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the alternating pattern would extend into the page to form a three-dimensional grid, wherein the core metal sections form islands {cylinders or columns} within the core polymer grid).
Regarding claim 3, Viswanathan in view of Yoon, discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 1, wherein the core polymer grid comprises evenly shaped sections (at least the central core polymer grid sections, between outermost core metal sections 46, are shown to have equal dimensions across the page.)
Regarding claim 5, Viswanathan in view of Yoon, discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of core metal sections and the core polymer sections are formed according to a heat dissipation pattern of the semiconductor power module (With reference to Figs 1-2 and ¶ [0013-17]) of Viswanathan, the power module 20 comprises a module heat sink 22 at its lower surface, which would accumulate heat from the module {obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art}, and the core metal sections are formed beneath the heat sink because of the accumulation of heat there, in order to direct a flow of heat from the module to the heat sink 52 {¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 20, Viswanathan discloses a method for manufacturing a hybrid bond sheet for mounting a semiconductor power module to a heat sink, the method comprising:
forming a thermally conductive core layer (40; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) having an upper main face (42; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) and a lower main face (44; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) opposing the upper main face;
forming a first bond layer (38/70; Figs 1,4; ¶ [0015,0036]) at the upper main face of the core layer for bonding the hybrid bond sheet to a semiconductor power module (20; Fig 4; ¶ [0012-13);
wherein the core layer is subdivided into a plurality of core metal sections (46; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016-17]) and second core sections (printed circuit board {PCB} 40; Figs 2,4; ¶ [0016]) which are formed side-by-side between the upper main face and the lower main face, and the plurality of core metal sections is configured to enable a uniform heat transfer between the semiconductor power module and the heat sink and to reduce thermal stress at interfaces between the hybrid bond sheet and the heat sink (¶ [0017]).
Viswanathan discloses adhering or otherwise fastening core layer 40 to heat sink 52 but does not disclose forming a second bond layer at the lower main face of the core layer for bonding the hybrid bond sheet to a heat sink.
In the same field of endeavor, Yoon discloses a semiconductor device package comprising a semiconductor power module (SC11,M11; Fig 13; ¶ [00112-113) attached to a bond sheet (SUB11, comprising a PCB; Fig 13; ¶ [0111]) by a first bond layer (B11; Fig 13; ¶ [0114]), and a heat sink (BP100; Fig 13; ¶ [0116]) attached to the bond sheet SUB11 by a second bond layer (B100; Fig 13; ¶ [0116]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have combined the second bond layer of Yoon with the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan to arrive at the limitations of claim 20. One would have been motivated to do this as means of fastening the heat sink to the core layer. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because of the similar stacked structure of Yoon and Viswanathan comprising similar components and methods of manufacturing, and because such a bond layer is well known in the art.
Viswanathan also does not disclose the second core sections are core polymer sections; however, this would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art because the term PCB implies a polymer composition, at least in the form of a resin material or as an encapsulation material. As reference, see printed circuit board 306 of Nikitin (¶ [0049]).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan) in view of Yoon; Jeong-Won et al. (US 2015/0115452; hereinafter Yoon), with reference to Nikitin; Ivan et al. (US 2020/0183056; hereinafter Nikitin),and further in view of Majumdar; Arunava et al. (US 2016/0126159; hereinafter Majumdar).
Regarding claim 4, Viswanathan in view of Yoon discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 2, but does not disclose wherein a size of the core metal islands is greater than a size of the core polymer grid.
In the same field of endeavor, Majumdar discloses an interposer (102; Fig 2; ¶ [0035]) comprising a thermally conductive core layer (206; Fig 2; ¶ [0035]) which is subdivided into core metal islands (202; Fig 2; ¶ [0035,0019]) configured to enable a uniform heat transfer (¶ [0016]) and having a width d of 50 microns (Fig 6; ¶ [0049]) and core polymer sections (204; Fig 2; ¶ [0035,0050]) which form a grid (Fig 6) having width s (p minus d) of 20 microns (Fig 6; ¶ [0049]); that is, a size of the core metal islands is greater than a size of the core polymer grid.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art configure the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan in view of Yoon according to claim 4. One would have been motivated to do this in order to increase a heat transfer capability of the core layer as taught by Majumdar (¶ [0049]), and would have had a reasonable expectation of success because of the similar materials and configuration of the interposer of Majumdar and the core layer of Viswanathan in view of Yoon.
Regarding claim 6, Viswanathan in view of Yoon discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the core layer comprises at least one of the of the following areas: areas in which an area fraction of the core metal sections is higher than an area fraction of the core polymer sections.
In the same field of endeavor, Majumdar discloses an interposer (102; Fig 2; ¶ [0035]) comprising a thermally conductive core layer (206; Fig 2; ¶ [0035]) which is subdivided into core metal sections (202; Fig 2; ¶ [0035,0019]) configured to enable a uniform heat transfer (¶ [0016]) and having an area fraction of 250 microns (Fig 6; ¶ [0049]) and core polymer sections (204; Fig 2; ¶ [0035,0050]) having an area fraction of 240 microns (Fig 6; 490-250=240, ¶ [0049]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art configure the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan in view of Yoon according to claim 6. One would have been motivated to do this in order to increase a heat transfer capability of the core layer as taught by Majumdar (¶ [0049]), and would have had a reasonable expectation of success because of the similar materials and configuration of the interposer of Majumdar and the core layer of Viswanathan in view of Yoon.
Claims 7, and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan) in view of Yoon; Jeong-Won et al. (US 2015/0115452; hereinafter Yoon), with reference to Nikitin; Ivan et al. (US 2020/0183056; hereinafter Nikitin), and further in view of Egitto; Frank et al. (US 2013/0025839; hereinafter Egitto).
Regarding claim 7, Viswanathan in view of Yoon, discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the first bond layer is subdivided into a plurality of first bond metal sections and first bond polymer sections which are formed side-by-side on the upper main face of the core layer; and wherein the second bond layer is subdivided into a plurality of second bond metal sections and second bond polymer sections which are formed side-by-side at the lower main face of the core layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Egitto discloses a thermal substrate (Fig 6; ¶ [0056-65]) similar to the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan in view of Yoon as applied to claim 1, comprising a first bond layer subdivided into a plurality of first bond metal sections (63; ¶ [0065]) and first bond polymer sections (55, comprising an epoxy resin polymer; ¶ [0063-64]) which are formed side-by-side on the upper main face of the core layer (upper {or lower, in Fig 5, 41 at bottom is a heat sink} surface of 15”); and wherein a second bond layer is subdivided into a plurality of second bond metal sections (63) and second bond polymer sections (55) which are formed side-by-side at the lower main face of the core layer (opposite face of 15”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have combined the first and second bond layers of Egitto with the hybrid bond sheet of Viswanathan in view of Yoon. One would have been motived to do this as an alternate bonding layer/method utilizing conventional solder mask and solder materials and methods rather than the sintering process of Viswanathan, which may provide manufacturing flexibility and/or cost savings. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because of the similar structures and endeavors of Egitto and Viswanathan.
Regarding claim 10, Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Egitto discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 7, but does not discloses wherein a material of the plurality of first bond metal sections is different from a material of the core metal sections (Viswanathan; 46, comprising copper; ¶ [0017]); Egitto; 19, comprising copper; ¶ [0052]) and a material of the plurality of second bond metal sections is different from a material of the core metal sections. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that a material of the core metal sections, comprising a solder material (Egitto; ¶ [0065]) may be different from copper, because typically in the art, solder material is different from copper (reference Yoon; ¶ [0032]), and one would have been motivated to use a material different from copper for manufacturing convenience and cost savings.
Regarding claim 11, Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Egitto discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 7,
wherein the first bond metal sections of the first bond layer are aligned with the core metal sections of the core layer (Egitto; as shown in Fig 5);
the first bond polymer sections of the first bond layer are aligned with the core polymer sections of the core layer (Egitto; as shown in Fig 5);
the second bond metal sections of the second bond layer are aligned with the core metal sections of the core layer (Egitto; as shown in Fig 5); and
the second bond polymer sections of the second bond layer are aligned with the core polymer sections of the core layer (Egitto; as shown in Fig 5).
Regarding claim 12, Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Egitto discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 7, but does not disclose wherein the subdivision of the first bond metal sections and the first bond polymer sections forms a different pattern than the subdivision of the core metal sections and the core polymer sections, and wherein the subdivision of the second bond metal sections and the second bond polymer sections forms a different pattern than the subdivision of the core metal sections and the core polymer sections; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that this may be the case: (1) the first bond metal sections (referring to Egitto; Figs 6 and/or 5) may comprise additional metal sections which are used by electrical circuits (Egitto; 33; ¶ [0056]) in connection with the semiconductor power module, but which do not correspond to the core metal sections and (2) regarding both the first bond layer and second bond layer, it has been held that changes in shape, such as to metal sections and polymer sections to satisfy the further limitation of claim 12, are a matter of choice in the absence of persuasive evidence that said change is significant. See MPEP 2144.04.IV.B. In this case, so long as the desired thermal connection is made, with reference to both Viswanathan and Egitto, a different pattern may satisfy the requirement.
Regarding claim 13, Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Egitto discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 7, wherein the subdivided first bond polymer sections (Egitto; 55; Fig 6) form a first polymer grid, and the subdivided core polymer sections (Egitto; the portions of 15” comprised of 33, between 19 and 21; Figs 6,3) form a second polymer grid, and a width of the first polymer grid is different from a width of the second polymer grid (as shown in Fig 6; an edge of 55 extends past edges of 33 and over 19).
Regarding claim 14, with reference to Jiang; Jieyun et al. (US 2013/0107483; hereinafter Jiang), Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Egitto discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 13, but does not disclose wherein the first polymer grid is subdividing the first bond metal sections into metal islands, the second polymer grid is subdividing the core metal sections into metal islands, and the metal islands formed by the second polymer grid are larger than the metal islands formed by the first polymer grid; however, this would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (Egitto; Fig 6; ¶ [0065]: first bond metal sections 63 are (solder) connections in a solder resist 55 between the semiconductor power module and the metal islands 17{21/19} (Figs 6{3}). It is common technical skill in the art for the solder resist to extend past the edge of an underlying contact/via/metal/pad to be connected; that is, to satisfy the limitation of claim 14, as depicted in Fig 6, where an edge of 55 extends past edges of 33 and over 19. For reference, see also solder mask clearance in Jiang (c1; Fig 1A; ¶ [0020-21})).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan) in view of Yoon; Jeong-Won et al. (US 2015/0115452; hereinafter Yoon), with reference to Nikitin; Ivan et al. (US 2020/0183056; hereinafter Nikitin), and further in view of Gambino; Jeffrey P. et al. (US 2016/0286660; hereinafter Gambino).
Regarding claim 15, Viswanathan in view of Yoon, discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the plurality of subdivided core metal sections (Viswanatha; thermal vias 46; Figs 2,4) forms a core metal grid that is subdividing the core polymer sections into core polymer islands.
In the same field of endeavor, Gamino discloses thermal vias (2206; Fig 22C; ¶ [0061]) in an interposer 2204 (Fig 22C) which subdivide the interposer into islands. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have configured the thermal vias of Viswanathan, as applied to the subdivided core metal sections of claim 1 in this manner, satisfying the limitation of claim 15. One would have been motivated to do this, with a reasonable expectation of success as a design choice to increase an area of the thermally conductive vias and thereby improve a transfer of heat from the semiconductor power module to the heat sink, for example.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan) in view of Yoon; Jeong-Won et al. (US 2015/0115452; hereinafter Yoon), with reference to Nikitin; Ivan et al. (US 2020/0183056; hereinafter Nikitin), further in view of Gambino; Jeffrey P. et al. (US 2016/0286660; hereinafter Gambino), and still further in view of Inoguchi; Hiroshi et al. (US 2021/0320054; hereinafter Inoguchi).
Regarding claim 16, Viswanathan in view of Yoon and further in view of Gambino discloses the hybrid bond sheet of claim 15, but does not disclose wherein the metal grid formed by the plurality of core metal sections comprises a leadframe.
In the same field of endeavor, Inoguchi discloses a hybrid bond sheet (102,110,112; Fig 1; ¶ [0041]) comprising a leadframe (102,202; Figs 1-3; ¶ [0041,0048-0050]) wherein the leadframe comprises a core metal grid (102,202) which subdivides sections of an encapsulation molding 212 (Figs 203; ¶ [0050]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the metal sections according to claim 15 may comprise a leadframe as taught by Inoguchi.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoguchi; Hiroshi et al. (US 2021/0320054; hereinafter Inoguchi) in view of Viswanathan; Lakshminarayan et al. (US 2018/0317312; hereinafter Viswanathan).
Regarding claim 17, Inoguchi discloses a cooled semiconductor power module (Figs 1,8-9 and ¶ [0040-47,0057-58]) in particular; entire document), comprising:
a semiconductor power module (808 {108}; Figs 8-9 {1}; ¶ [0058 {0043}]); and
a hybrid bond sheet (leadframe 802 {102} and encapsulation material 812, upper bonding layer 806 {112}, and lower bonding layer {110}; Figs 8-9, {1}; ¶ [0058,{0042}]) configured to bond the semiconductor power module to a heat sink (804; Figs 8-9; ¶ [0058]);
wherein a first bond layer (806/112, 812) of the hybrid bond sheet is attached to the semiconductor power module forming a first fully polymer encapsulated electrically and thermally conductive connection, and a second bond layer (110, 812) of the hybrid bond sheet is attached to the heat sink forming a second fully polymer encapsulated electrically and thermally conductive connection (812 fully encapsulates the connections).
Inoguchi does not disclose a semiconductor power module comprises: a thermally conductive substrate having a substrate upper main face and a substrate lower main face opposing the substrate upper main face; a semiconductor chip attached to the substrate upper main face; a mold compound at least partially encapsulating the semiconductor chip; and the hybrid bond sheet is attached to the lower main face of the substrate of the power module.
In the same field of endeavor, Viswanathan discloses a semiconductor power module (Fig 1; ¶ [0012-15]) comprising:
a thermally conductive substrate (22; Fig 1; ¶ [0012,0014]) having a substrate upper main face and a substrate lower main face opposing the substrate upper main face;
a semiconductor chip (28; Fig 1; ¶ [0012-13]) attached to the substrate upper main face;
a mold compound (36; Fig 1; ¶ [0012]) at least partially encapsulating the semiconductor chip.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have combined the features of the semiconductor power module of Viswanathan with that of Inoguchi, and to have attached the hybrid bond sheet to the substrate lower main face. One would have been motivated to do this, with a reasonable expectation of success, because the features are common in the art for a power module, and the substrate of Viswanathan is configured for bonding at the lower main face.
Regarding claim 18, Inoguchi in view of Viswanathan discloses the cooled power semiconductor module of claim 17, wherein: the heat sink is attached to the semiconductor power module, and interfaces formed by the fully polymer encapsulated electrically and thermally conductive connection of the first bond layer and the second bond layer form a non-remelting electrical and mechanical connection (Inoguchi; ¶ [0042, 0072]); bonding layers 110 and 112 may be formed by techniques, such as sintering and ultrasonic or laser welding, known in the art as non-remelting electrical and mechanical connection techniques.
Regarding claim 19, Inoguchi in view of Viswanathan discloses the cooled power semiconductor module of claim 17, wherein interfaces formed by the fully polymer encapsulated electrically and thermally conductive connection of the first bond layer and/or the second bond layer form one of a diffusion soldering connection, a sintering connection, a force-fitted metal connection, or a nano-wire connection (Inoguchi; ¶ [0042, 0072]); bonding layers 110 and 112 may be formed by at least by sintering).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 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.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the combination of limitations including “wherein the first bond layer is configured to provide a simultaneous bonding by the following two mechanisms: metallurgical bonding of the first bond metal sections to any metal; and glueing or encapsulating of the first bond polymer sections to form an insulating bond to any surface; and the second bond layer is configured to provide a simultaneous bonding by the following two mechanisms: metallurgical bonding of the second bond metal sections to any metal; and glueing or encapsulating of the second bond polymer sections to form an insulating bond to any surface”, along with the additional limitations of Claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the combination of limitations including “wherein a first bond interface formed by the first bond layer is configured to be free of channels, voids, gaps or unfilled spaces; and a second bond interface formed by the second bond layer is configured designed to be free of channels, voids, gaps or unfilled spaces“, along with the additional limitations of Claim 9.
Regarding claims 13-14, the prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the combination of limitations including “wherein the subdivided first bond polymer sections form a first polymer grid, and the subdivided core polymer sections form a second polymer grid, and a width of the first polymer grid is different from a width of the second polymer grid“ along with the additional limitations of Claim 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRAD KNUDSON whose telephone number is (703)756-4582. The examiner can normally be reached Telework 9:30 -18:30 ET; M-F.
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, Eliseo Ramos Feliciano can be reached at 571-272-7925. 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.
/B.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/ELISEO RAMOS FELICIANO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
