DETAILED ACTION
I. 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 .
II. Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is also acknowledged of the certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
III. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
A. Claims 1-5,15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of
Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2)
As to claim 1, Yun et al. teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1, image sensor “1000”) comprising:
a sensor substrate (Fig. 28A, sensor substrate “110”) comprising a plurality of pixels (Fig. 1, pixel array “1100”; Fig. 28A, light sensing cells “111-113”); and
a nano-photonic lens array (Fig. 28A, color separating lens array “130”) comprising a plurality of nanostructures (Figs. 28A and 28B; [0174], lines 1-3) configured to separate light based on wavelength of the light and focus the light onto a corresponding pixel among the plurality of pixels ([0174], lines 3-8).
Claim 1 differs from Yun et al. in that it requires that the image sensor includes an organic photoelectric conversion layer positioned between the sensor substrate and the nano-photonic lens array and configured to absorb photons and multiply carriers. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Rosselli et al. discloses a perylene-based photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 3, photoelectric conversion material layer “3”; col. 66, lines 31-33) for a color image sensor (col. 66, lines 39-48). The conversion layer is positioned on a sensor substrate (Fig. 3, substrate “1”) and is designed to produce an exciton in response to incident light (col. 39, lines 9-15; {A single photon produces at least one exciton consisting of an electron and hole pair, which are both charge carriers. Therefore, Rosselli’s conversion layer produces multiple carriers from a single incident photon (i.e., multiplies carriers).}). In light of the teaching of Rosselli et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design Yun’s light-sensing cells using a perylene-based photoelectric conversion layer, like that disclosed by Rosselli et al., and corresponding electrodes to dissociate excitons. As Rosselli et al. notes in col. 39, lines 9-15, a perylene-based conversion layer can produce high quantum and absorption efficiencies as well as high exciton diffusion and dissociation efficiencies, which can improve light collection and utilization despite photon reduction during color filtering (col. 1, lines 42-46 of Rosselli et al.).
As to claim 2, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1, wherein the organic photoelectric conversion layer comprises a singlet fission material (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33, “…perylene-base[d] molecule…”; and col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”).
As to claim 3, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 2, wherein the singlet fission material comprises polyacene (see Rosselli et al., col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”), rylene (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33, “…perylene-base[d] molecule…”), rubrene, biradicaloid, or any combination thereof.
As to claim 4, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 3, wherein the polyacene comprises anthracene, tetracene, pentacene (see Rosselli et al., col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”), or any combination thereof.
As to claim 5, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 3, wherein the rylene comprises perylene (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33), terylene, or any combination thereof.
As to claim 15, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of nanostructures comprises a first nanostructure and a second nanostructure (see Yun et al., Fig. 37, nanoposts “NP1” and “NP2”), and
wherein the first nanostructure and the second nanostructure are arranged in a multi-layer structure (see Yun, Fig. 37).
As to claim 17, Yun et al. teaches an electronic apparatus (Fig. 38, electronic apparatus “1801”) comprising:
an image sensor (Fig. 1, image sensor “1000”) configured to convert an optical image into an electrical signal ([0091], lines 1-5); and
a processor configured to control operation of the image sensor and store and output signals generated by the image sensor ([0215]),
wherein the image sensor comprises:
a sensor substrate (Fig. 28A, sensor substrate “110”) comprising a plurality of pixels (Fig. 1, pixel array “1100”; Fig. 28A, light sensing cells “111-113”); and
a nano-photonic lens array (Fig. 28A, color separating lens array “130”) comprising a plurality of nanostructures (Figs. 28A and 28B; [0174], lines 1-3) configured to separate light based on wavelength of the light and focus the light onto a corresponding pixel among the plurality of pixels ([0174], lines 3-8).
Claim 17 differs from Yun et al. in that the image sensor comprises an organic photoelectric conversion layer positioned between the sensor substrate and the nano-photonic lens array and configured to absorb photons and multiply carriers. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Rosselli et al. discloses a perylene-based photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 3, photoelectric conversion material layer “3”; col. 66, lines 31-33) for a color image sensor (col. 66, lines 39-48). The conversion layer is positioned on a sensor substrate (Fig. 3, substrate “1”) and is designed to produce an exciton in response to incident light (col. 39, lines 9-15; {A single photon produces at least one exciton consisting of an electron and hole pair, which are both charge carriers. Therefore, Rosselli’s conversion layer produces multiple carriers from a single incident photon (i.e., multiplies carriers).}). In light of the teaching of Rosselli et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design Yun’s light-sensing cells using a perylene-based photoelectric conversion layer, like that disclosed by Rosselli et al., and corresponding electrodes to dissociate excitons. As Rosselli et al. notes in col. 39, lines 9-15, a perylene-based conversion layer can produce high quantum and absorption efficiencies as well as high exciton diffusion and dissociation efficiencies, which can improve light collection and utilization despite photon reduction during color filtering (col. 1, lines 42-46 of Rosselli et al.).
As to claim 18, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the electronic apparatus of claim 17, wherein the organic photoelectric conversion layer comprises a singlet fission material (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33, “…perylene-base[d] molecule…”; and col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”).
As to claim 19, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the electronic apparatus of claim 18, wherein the singlet fission material comprises polyacene (see Rosselli et al., col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”), rylene (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33, “…perylene-base[d] molecule…”), rubrene, biradicaloid, or any combination thereof.
As to claim 20, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the electronic apparatus of claim 19, wherein the polyacene comprises anthracene, tetracene, pentacene (see Rosselli et al., col. 36, line 59 – col. 37, line 2, “…fused acenes, such as pentacene-based and tetracene-based…molecules.”), or any combination thereof, and
wherein the rylene comprises perylene (see Rosselli et al., col. 66, lines 31-33, “…perylene-base[d] molecule…”), terylene, or any combination thereof.
B. Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) and further in view of Baldo et al. (US 2019/0372038 A1)
As to claim 6, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1. The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., in that it requires that the image sensor includes an intermediate layer positioned between the sensor substrate and the organic photoelectric conversion layer and configured to prevent recombination of charge-electron pairs and that a thickness of the intermediate layer is in a range from 1 nm to 10 nm.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Baldo et al. teaches a photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 1, layer “102”) with general applicability to optoelectronic systems ([0029]). The layer is made from a singlet fission material that produces a plurality of excitons in response to incident light ([0055], lines 9-11; [0058], lines 1-5). Additionally, an interlayer (Fig. 1, interlayer “104”) comprising an oxide or nitride material ([0055], lines 6-8) is positioned between a semiconductor substrate (Fig. 1, substrate “106”) and the photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 1; [0055], lines 6-9); the interlayer has a thickness of 1.5 nm ([0043], lines 19-24, “…15 Angstroms…”). In light of the teaching of Baldo et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to position an oxide-based or nitride-interlayer, like that of Baldo et al., between the substrate and photoelectric conversion layer of Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al. As Baldo et al. notes in para. [0035], lines 9-13, passivation of the interlayer can both facilitate exciton transfer as well as prevent rapid recombination of electron-hole pairs, thereby leading to improved light collection.
As to claim 8, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1. The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., in that it requires that a thickness of the organic photoelectric conversion layer is in a range from 10 nm to 100 nm. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Baldo et al. teaches a photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 1, layer “102”) with general applicability to optoelectronic systems ([0029]). The layer is made from a singlet fission material and measures 100 nm or less in thickness ([0045], lines 31-33). In light of the teaching of Baldo et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the conversion layer of Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., for a thickness of 100 nm or less as this thickness is on par with average conversion layer thicknesses for image sensor applications and would allow for sufficient singlet fission in such applications.
C. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) and further in view of Ahn et al. (US 2022/0344399 A1)
As to claim 7, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1, further comprising a spacer layer between the organic photoelectric conversion layer and the nano-photonic lens array (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, transparent spacer layer “120”). The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., in that it requires that a thickness of the spacer layer is in a range from 500 nm to 1000 nm. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Ahn et al. discloses an image sensor including a spacer layer between a photoelectric conversion layer and a nano-photonic lens array (Fig. 4A, spacer layer “120”) that measures 820 nm in thickness ([0083], lines 1-9). In light of the teaching of Ahn et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the spacer layer of Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., for a thickness of 820 nm as this would ensure acceptable convergence of light rays on the photoelectric conversion layer given the refractive index of the spacer layer and reasonable assumptions regarding the wavelength and focal distance of incident light and pixel pitch.
As to claim 9, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al. and Ahn et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 7, further comprising a color filter layer between the organic photoelectric conversion layer and the spacer layer (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, color filter layer “140”),
wherein the color filter layer comprises a plurality of color filters (see Yun et al., Figs. 28A and 28B; [0168], lines 6-11).
D. Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) in view of Ahn et al. (US 2022/0344399 A1) and further in view of
Nagata (US 2011/0074960 A1)
As to claims 10 and 14, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al. and Ahn et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 9. The claims differ from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al. and Ahn et al., in that they require that the plurality of color filters are organic (inorganic) color filters. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Nagata teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of pixels (Fig. 1, pixels “2”) beneath a plurality different color filters (Fig. 1, color filters “6a-6c”), which may be either organic or inorganic filters ([0026]). In light of the teaching of Nagata, the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use either organic or inorganic color filters in Yun’s color filter layer because one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the comparative advantages of both types of filters–organic filters offer better color reproduction with reduced optical crosstalk while inorganic filters are comparatively more sensitive to light in a specific spectral range and are less susceptible to performance degradation due to external factors, like temperature and humidity.
E. Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) in view of Ahn et al. (US 2022/0344399 A1) in view of
Nagata (US 2011/0074960 A1) and further in view of
Ohkubo et al. (US 2024/0413179 A1)
As to claim 11, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., and Nagata, teaches the image sensor of claim 10. The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., and Nagata, in that it requires that the image sensor includes a barrier wall between the plurality of color filters. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Ohkubo et al. teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1, imaging device “1”) comprising a plurality of photoelectric conversion layers (Fig. 1, photodiodes “12”) beneath a plurality different color filters (Fig. 1, color filters “21”). A barrier wall (Fig. 1, element separator “13” and separation wall “23”) is located between the individual color filters and between individual photoelectric conversion layers of the pixels (Fig. 1). In light of the teaching of Ohkubo et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to place a barrier wall between the color filters and photoelectric conversion layers of Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., and Nagata, because this would effectively reduce both optical and electrical cross-talk between adjacent pixels, thereby leading to higher quality pixel signals.
As to claim 12, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., Nagata, and Ohkubo et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 11, wherein the barrier wall extends to a certain portion of the organic photoelectric conversion layer (see Ohkubo et al., Fig. 1).
F. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) in view of Ohkubo et al. (US 2024/0413179 A1) in view of Ahn et al. (US 2022/0344399 A1) in view of Nagata (US 2011/0074960 A1) in view of
Ohkubo et al. (US 2024/0413179 A1)and further in view of
Mu et al. (US 2019/0189694 A1)
As to claim 13, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., Nagata, and Ohkubo et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 12, wherein the organic photoelectric conversion layer comprises a plurality of organic photoelectric conversion elements (see Yun et al., Figs. 28A and 28, light-sensing cells “111-114”; see Rosselli, Fig. 3, photoelectric conversion material layer “3”; col. 66, lines 31-33). The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., Nagata, and Ohkubo et al., in that it requires that the plurality of organic photoelectric conversion elements have different thicknesses based on a color of a corresponding color filter.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Mu et al. teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1, image sensor “100”) comprising a plurality of photoelectric conversion layers (Fig. 1, photoelectric conversion films “121”) beneath a plurality different color filters (Fig. 1, color filters “111”). Photoelectric conversion layers corresponding to different color filters may be designed with different heights ([0034]). In light of the teaching of Mu et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the photoelectric conversion layers of the light-sensing cells of Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., Ahn et al., Nagata, and Ohkubo et al., with different heights as this would add yet another color filtering mechanism by suppressing colors of light that cannot penetrate certain depths, which would facilitate generation of pixel signals within a precise spectral range.
G. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) and further in view of Zhan et al. (US 2023/0262307 A1)
As to claim 16, Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 1. The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Rosselli et al., in that it requires that image sensor includes an anti-reflection film on the nano-photonic lens array. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Zhan et al. teaches a camera (Fig. 1, camera “110n”) comprising an image sensor and a meta-optical lens on which an anti-reflective coating is disposed ([0045], lines 1-4). In light of the teaching of Zhan et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to place an anti-reflective coating on Yun’s color separating nano-photonic lens array because this would ensure transmission of substantially all incident light through the lens, thereby leading to pixel data with high signal-to-noise ratio.
H. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Baldo et al. (US 2019/0372038 A1) and further in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2)
As to claim 21, Yun et al. teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1, image sensor “1000”) comprising:
a sensor substrate (Fig. 28A, sensor substrate “110”) comprising a plurality of pixels (Fig. 1, pixel array “1100”; Fig. 28A, light sensing cells “111-113”); and
a nano-photonic lens array (Fig. 28A, color separating lens array “130”) comprising a plurality of nanostructures (Figs. 28A and 28B; [0174], lines 1-3) configured to separate light based on wavelength of the light and focus the light onto a corresponding pixel among the plurality of pixels ([0174], lines 3-8).
Claim 1 differs from Yun et al. in that it requires an organic photoelectric conversion layer positioned between the sensor substrate and the nano-photonic lens array and configured to absorb photons and increase a number of excitons. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Baldo et al. teaches a photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 1, layer “102”) with general applicability to optoelectronic systems ([0029]). The layer is made from a singlet fission material that produces a plurality of excitons in response to incident light ([0055], lines 9-11; [0058], lines 1-5). Further in the same field of endeavor, Rosselli et al. discloses a perylene-based singlet-fission photoelectric conversion layer (Fig. 3, photoelectric conversion material layer “3”; col. 66, lines 31-33) with specific applicability to a color image sensor (col. 66, lines 39-48).
In light of the teaching of Baldo et al. and Rosselli et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design Yun’s light-sensing cells using a singlet fission material including either or both of Baldo’s polyacene-based or Rosselli’s rylene-based molecules that are tuned to generate multiple excitons in response to incident light. As suggested by both references, acene-based and/or rylene-based conversion layers can produce multiple excitons from a single incident photon while demonstrating high exciton diffusion and dissociation efficiencies, which can improve light collection and utilization despite photon reduction during color filtering (col. 1, lines 42-46 of Rosselli et al.).
I. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 2022/0326415 A1) in view of Baldo et al. (US 2019/0372038 A1) in view of Rosselli et al. (US # 9,978,951 B2) and further in view of Mu et al. (US 2019/0189694 A1)
As to claim 22, Yun et al., as modified by Baldo et al. and Rosselli et al., teaches the image sensor of claim 21, wherein the organic photoelectric conversion layer (see, e.g., Rosselli et al., Fig. 3, photoelectric conversion material layer “3”; col. 66, lines 31-33) comprises a first organic photoelectric conversion element (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, first light-sensing cell “111”) corresponding to a first color filter (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, first color filter “141”), a second organic photoelectric conversion element (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, second light-sensing cell “112”) corresponding to a second color filter (see Yun et al., Fig. 28A, second color filter “142”), a third organic photoelectric conversion element (see Yun et al., Fig. 28B, third light-sensing cell “113”) corresponding to a third color filter (see Yun et al., Fig. 28B, third color filter “143”), and a fourth organic photoelectric conversion element (see Yun et al., Fig. 28B, fourth light-sensing cell “114”) corresponding to a fourth color filter (see Yun et al., Fig. 28B, fourth color filter “144”). The claim differs from Yun et al., as modified by Baldo et al. and Rosselli et al., in that it requires that at least two of a thickness of the first organic photoelectric conversion element, a thickness of the second organic photoelectric conversion element, a thickness of the third organic photoelectric conversion element and a thickness of a fourth organic photoelectric conversion element are different from each other.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Mu et al. teaches an image sensor (Fig. 1, image sensor “100”) comprising a plurality of photoelectric conversion layers (Fig. 1, photoelectric conversion films “121”) beneath a plurality different color filters (Fig. 1, color filters “111”; [0032]). Photoelectric conversion layers corresponding to different color filters may be designed with different heights ([0034]). In light of the teaching of Mu et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the photoelectric conversion layers of the light-sensing cells of Yun et al., as modified by Baldo et al. and Rosselli et al., with different heights as this would add yet another color filtering mechanism by suppressing colors of light that cannot penetrate certain depths, which would facilitate generation of pixel signals within a precise spectral range.
IV. Additional Pertinent Prior Art
Kobayashi et al. (US 2023/0027447 A1) and Yang et al. (US 2017/0110608 A1) each disclose an example of a photoelectric conversion layer in an image sensor that generates multiple excitons in response to incident light.
V. Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J DANIELS whose telephone number is (571)272-7362. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 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, Sinh Tran can be reached at 571-272-7564. 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.
/ANTHONY J DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
3/4/2026