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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 61-80 and 82-84 are currently pending and under examination.
Claim Objections
In view of the amendment filed on 12/11/2025 amending claim 82 to clarify the language the objections made against claim 82 in the office action of 6/11/2025 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
In view of the amendment filed on 12/11/2025 amending claims 61, 74 and 82 to clarify the language and canceling claim 81 the 112 rejections made against the claims in the office action of 6/11/2025 have been withdrawn.
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.
Claim 84 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 (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 84 recites “two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient are other than posture”, it is unclear what actions application is attempting to encompass or exclude by reciting “two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient are other than posture”. Would lifting a leg, walking, running and/or raising an arm be considered action that are other than posture? Clarification is required. It is suggested to recite within the claim such as with a list which actions applicant is intending to encompass to provide clarification.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 61-62, 70-76 and 79-80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0172927 to Sahasrabudhe et al. (Sahasrabudhe) (previously cited).
In reference to at least claim 61
Sahasrabudhe discloses a method comprising: sensing intentional performance by a patient of a designated physical action (e.g. tapping, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]-[0271]) via an implantable sensor implanted within the patient (e.g. one or more sensors 40, Fig. 2, accelerometer-based sensor, para. [0066],[0069]-[0070], [0094], [0267]); wherein performance of the designated physical action by the patient is intended to prompt operational control of the implantable medical device system (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]) and comprises at least two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient in one of a simultaneous fashion and in rapid succession, each of the at least two distinct actions being sensed by the implantable sensor implanted in the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping on the accelerometer within the IMD and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture), wherein a motion and a body part of the patient utilized in performing a first one of the at least two distinct action are different from a motion and body part of the patient utilized in performing a second one of the at least two distinct actions (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270], [0275], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping “motion” on the accelerometer within the IMD with a finger “body part” and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture using a torso and/or legs “different motion and body part”); and controlling operation of an implantable medical device system based upon the sensed performance of the designated physical action (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]), the implantable medical device system including an implantable medical device implanted within the patient (e.g. implantable medical device, 12, Figs. 1-2).
In reference to at least claim 62
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the step of controlling includes altering an operational mode of the implantable medical device (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208])
In reference to at least claim 70
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the implantable sensor includes a motion-based transducer sensor component (e.g. one or more sensors 40, Fig. 2, accelerometer-based sensor, para. [0066],[0069]-[0070], [0094], [0267]).
In reference to at least claim 71
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein a first one of the distinct actions includes tapping on a body of the patient in a region of a sensor component of the implantable sensor (e.g. tapping an accelerometer, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]) and a second one of the distinct actions is selected from the group consisting of raising an arm, walking, spinning and jumping (e.g. “second distinct action” is an activity component such as footfalls that is used to determine a vector corresponding to a posture state, para. [0014], [0084]).
In reference to at least claim 72
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the implantable medical device system is programmed to recognize a plurality of different designated physical actions (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy based on posture state, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]; various posture states, para. [0006]-[0008]), and further wherein the implantable sensor generates a signal indicative of a sensed physical action characteristic of the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]; posture state definitions described in terms of one or more vectors, para. [0006]-[0008], [0118]-[0120]); the method further comprising: receiving a signal from the implantable sensor; and recognizing performance of a current designated physical action from the plurality of different designated physical actions based upon the signal (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]; posture state definitions described in terms of one or more vectors, para. [0006]-[0008], [0118]-[0120], [0226]).
In reference to at least claim 73
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the implantable medical device system is programmed to perform a different control operation in response to each of the plurality of different designated physical actions (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy based on posture state, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]; therapy parameters are associated with the posture state definition, para. [0010]-[0011], [0167]-[0168], [0214]).
In reference to at least claim 74
Sahasrabudhe discloses which discloses a system for treating a patient comprising: an implantable medical device system including an implantable medical device (e.g. implantable medical device system with implantable medical device, 12, Figs. 1-2); and an implantable sensor configured to at least sense a characteristic indicative of intentional performance by the patient of a designated physical action (e.g. one or more sensors 40, Fig. 2, accelerometer-based sensor, para. [0066],[0069]-[0070], [0094], [0267]); wherein performance of the designated physical action by the patient is intended to prompt operational control of the implantable medical device system (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]), and comprises at least two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient in one of a simultaneous fashion and in rapid succession, each of the at least two distinct actions being sensed by the implantable sensor implanted in the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping on the accelerometer within the IMD and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture); wherein a motion and a body part of the patient utilized in performing a first one of the at least two distinct action are different from a motion and body part of the patient utilized in performing a second one of the at least two distinct actions (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping “motion” on the accelerometer within the IMD with a finger “body part” and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture using a torso and/or legs “different motion and body part”); wherein the implantable medical device system is programmed to control operation of an implantable medical device system based upon the sensed performance of the designated physical action (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as adjusting therapy, para. [0008],[0167], [0206]-[0208]).
In reference to at least claim 75
Sahasrabudhe discloses an external device configured to be operable as part of the system from outside the patient (e.g. external medical device, para. [0077]; sensor 40 may be located external to the patient, para. [0097], [0170]).
In reference to at least claim 76
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the designated physical action includes a signal generated by the external device (e.g. external medical device, para. [0077]; sensor 40 may be located external to the patient, para. [0097], [0170]).
In reference to at least claim 79
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the implantable sensor includes a motion-based transducer sensor component (e.g. one or more sensors 40, Fig. 2, accelerometer-based sensor, para. [0066],[0069]-[0070], [0094], [0267]).
In reference to at least claim 80
Sahasrabudhe discloses wherein the motion-based transducer sensor includes a component selected from the group consisting of an accelerometer, a gyroscope and a pressure sensor (e.g. one or more sensors 40, Fig. 2, accelerometer-based sensor, para. [0066],[0069]-[0070], [0094], [0267]).
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.
Claim(s) 63-68 and 77 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0172927 to Sahasrabudhe et al. (Sahasrabudhe) as applied to claims 61 and 74 further in view of US 2016/0250490 to Hoffman et al. (Hoffman) (previously cited).
In reference to at least claim 63
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 61. Sahasrabudhe further discloses wherein the implantable medical device system further includes an external device located outside the patient and configured to wirelessly communicated with the implantable medical device (e.g. 20) and that any external medical devices may also be used (e.g. “external device” para. [0077], [0107], [0389]) and discloses wherein the designated physical action includes tapping on a body of the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]) but does not explicitly teach wherein the step of controlling includes initiating an authenticated communication link between the implantable medical device and the external device.
Hoffman, in the same field of stimulation, discloses wireless communication between an implanted device and an external device (e.g. Fig. 2, abstract, ) in which a security information data packet (e.g. Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241]) and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device (e.g. para. [0185]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sahasrabudhe to include initiating an authenticated communication link such as by the use of a security packet and/or unique tapping between the implantable medical device and the external device, as taught by Hoffman, to provide a communication between the devices that provides security to maintain patient’s privacy and prevent unauthorized or inadvertent programming of the IMD (e.g. ‘490, para. [0004]).
In reference to at least claim 64
Sahasrabudhe modified by Hoffman renders obvious a method according to claim 63. Sahasrabudhe further discloses wherein the external device is selected from the group consisting of a smart phone, a tablet computer, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, a remote control, a clinical programmer, and a communication bridge (e.g. external programmer 20).
In reference to at least claim 65
Sahasrabudhe modified by Hoffman renders obvious a method according to claim 63. Hoffman further discloses wherein the step of initiating is performed as part of a pairing process between the implantable medical device and the external device (e.g. security information data packet, Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241] and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device, para. [0185]).
In reference to at least claim 66
Sahasrabudhe modified by Hoffman renders obvious a method according to claim 65. Hoffman further discloses wherein the pairing process establishes a secure communication link between the implantable medical device and the external device. (e.g. security information data packet, Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241] and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device, para. [0185]).
In reference to at least claim 67
Sahasrabudhe modified by Hoffman renders obvious a method according to claim 63. Hoffman further discloses operating the external device to initiate a pairing process between the external device and the implantable medical device (e.g. security information data packet, Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241] and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device, para. [0185]); and completing the pairing process only if the step of sensing corresponds with the step of operating the external device to initiate the pairing process (e.g. security information data packet, Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241] and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device, para. [0185]).
In reference to at least claim 68
Sahasrabudhe modified by Hoffman renders obvious a method according to claim 63. Sahasrabudhe further discloses positioning the external device proximate the sensor; and sensing the intentional performance by the patient of the designated physical action via an external sensor carried by the external device simultaneously with the step of sensing via the implantable sensor (e.g. external medical device may classify posture states, para. [0077]; “accelerometers or other position sensors located at various positions on the external surface of the patient”, para. [0097]).
In reference to at least claim 77
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 61. Sahasrabudhe further discloses wherein the implantable medical device system further includes an external device located outside the patient and configured to wirelessly communicated with the implantable medical device (e.g. 20) and that any external medical devices may also be used (e.g. “external device” para. [0077], [0107], [0389]) and discloses wherein the designated physical action includes tapping on a body of the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, para. [0018], [0267], [0270]) but does not explicitly teach the telemetry protocol instructions including establishing an authenticated communication link between the implantable medical device and the external device and include identification of an occurrence of the designated physical action.
Hoffman discloses wireless communication between an implanted device and an external device (e.g. Fig. 2, abstract, ) in which a security information data packet (e.g. Figs. 7, 14, para. [0196]-[0198], [0210]-[0212], [0241]) and/or a tapping of a unique pattern applied to the body is used to authorize a telemetry session between an external device and an implanted device (e.g. para. [0185]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Sahasrabudhe to include the telemetry protocol instructions including establishing an authenticated communication link between the implantable medical device and the external device and identification of an occurrence of the designated physical action, as taught by Hoffman, to provide a communication protocol between the devices that provides security to maintain patient’s privacy and prevent unauthorized or inadvertent programming of the IMD (e.g. ‘490, para. [0004]).
Claim(s) 69 and 82 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0172927 to Sahasrabudhe et al. (Sahasrabudhe) in view of WO 2017/184753 to Dieken et al. (Dieken) (previously cited).
In reference to at least claim 69
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 61 and further discloses that the examples of therapies that can be delivered include electrical stimulation or therapeutic agents (e.g. para. [0065]) but does not explicitly teach operating the implantable medical device to treat sleep disordered breathing.
Dieken, in the same field of stimulation, discloses a method comprising: sensing intentional performance by a patient of a designated physical action (e.g. tapping an accelerometer, para. [00125]) via an implantable sensor implanted within the patient (e.g. accelerometer-based sensor 160/660, Figs. 1A-1B,16 para. [0037], [0076], [00125]); wherein performance of the designated physical action by the patient is intended to prompt operational control of the implantable medical device system (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as pausing, starting and/or stopping therapy and the like, para. [00125]) and comprises at least two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient in one of a simultaneous fashion and in rapid succession, each of the at least two distinct actions being sensed by the implantable sensor implanted in the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer in a particular pattern such as a certain number of taps within a certain time period, each tap is considered a “distinct action”, para. [00125]) and controlling operation of an implantable medical device system based upon the sensed performance of the designated physical action (e.g. tapping an accelerometer in a particular pattern such as a certain number of taps within a certain time period, para. [00125]), the implantable medical device system including an implantable medical device implanted within the patient (e.g. implantable neurostimulation therapy system 100/200/300, Figs. 1B-8B). Dieken further discloses operating the implantable medical device to treat sleep disordered breathing (e.g. treating sleep disordered breathing, para. [0036], [0046], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sahasrabudhe to include operating the implantable medical device to treat sleep disordered breathing, as taught by Dieken, in order to provide additional capabilities to the neurostimulator for treating obstructive sleep apnea (‘282, para. [0039]).
In reference to at least claim 82
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 61 and further discloses that the examples of therapies that can be delivered include electrical stimulation or therapeutic agents (e.g. para. [0065]) but does not explicitly teach wherein the system is programmed to prompt a sensor of the implantable medical device system to switch from a low sampling rate operational mode to a high sampling rate operation mode in response to the sensed performance of the designated physical action, wherein a sampling rate of the low sampling rate operation mode is less than a sampling rate of the high sampling rate operational mode.
Dieken discloses a method comprising: sensing intentional performance by a patient of a designated physical action (e.g. tapping an accelerometer, para. [00125]) via an implantable sensor implanted within the patient (e.g. accelerometer-based sensor 160/660, Figs. 1A-1B,16 para. [0037], [0076], [00125]); wherein performance of the designated physical action by the patient is intended to prompt operational control of the implantable medical device system (e.g. provides operational control of the implantable medical device system such as pausing, starting and/or stopping therapy and the like, para. [00125]) and comprises at least two distinct actions intentionally performed by the patient in one of a simultaneous fashion and in rapid succession, each of the at least two distinct actions being sensed by the implantable sensor implanted in the patient (e.g. tapping an accelerometer in a particular pattern such as a certain number of taps within a certain time period, each tap is considered a “distinct action”, para. [00125]) and controlling operation of an implantable medical device system based upon the sensed performance of the designated physical action (e.g. tapping an accelerometer in a particular pattern such as a certain number of taps within a certain time period, para. [00125]), the implantable medical device system including an implantable medical device implanted within the patient (e.g. implantable neurostimulation therapy system 100/200/300, Figs. 1B-8B). Dieken further discloses wherein the system is programmed to prompt a sensor of the implantable medical device system to switch from a low sampling rate operational mode to a high sampling rate operation mode in response to the sensed performance of the designated physical action, wherein a sampling rate of the low sampling rate operation mode is less than a sampling rate of the high sampling rate operational mode (e.g. a sampling rate is increased when activity levels are changing quickly (e.g. measured values of sequential samples changes) and is decreased when the measured value of sequential samples are relatively stable. In some examples, the activity function 842 operates in cooperation with other functions, such as posture function 840 (FIG. 11A) and posture information detection engine 1400 (FIG. 16).”, para. [0112]-[0113]) in order to manage power used for sensing (e.g. para. [0183]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sahasrabudhe to include the system being programmed to prompt the sensor of the implantable medical device system to switch from a low sampling rate operational mode to a high sampling rate operation mode in response to the sensed performance of the designated physical action showing increased activity levels, as taught by Dieken, in order to manage power used for sensing (e.g. para. [0183]).
Claim(s) 78 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0172927 to Sahasrabudhe et al. (Sahasrabudhe) in view of US 2015/0065047 to Wu et al. (Wu) (previously cited).
In reference to at least claim 78
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 74. Sahasrabudhe further discloses wherein the implantable medical device system further includes an external device located outside the patient and configured to wirelessly communicated with the implantable medical device (e.g. 20) and that any external medical devices may also be used (e.g. “external device” para. [0077], [0107], [0389]) but does not explicitly teach wherein the system is programmed to prompt the implantable medical device to switch from a sleep operational mode to a pairing operational mode in response to the sensed performance of the designated physical action.
Wu. in the same field of stimulation, discloses communication between an implanted device and an external device (e.g. Figs. 4,6) in which the implantable medical device is prompted to switch from a sleep operational mode to a pairing operational mode in response to a sensed performance of a designated physical action (e.g. authorized communication when a valid wake-up signal is received from an authorized external instrument, para. [0028]-[0030]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Sahasrabudhe to include prompting the implantable medical device to switch from a sleep operational mode to a pairing operational mode in response to the sensed performance of the designated physical action, as taught by Wu, to provide a communication between the devices that provides low power consumption within the implanted device and provides security that maintains patient’s privacy and reduces unauthorized or inadvertent programming of the IMD from rouge devices (e.g. ‘047, para. [0006], [0023]).
Claim(s) 83 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0172927 to Sahasrabudhe et al. (Sahasrabudhe) in view of US 2008/0300470 to Gerber et al. (Gerber) (previously cited).
In reference to at least claim 83
Sahasrabudhe teaches a system according to claim 61 and further discloses that the sensor can be located anywhere within the patient (e.g. para. [0095]) but does not explicitly teach implanting the implantable sensor in one of a neck and a pectoralis of the patient.
Gerber, in the same field of stimulation, discloses collecting patient activity data using a sensor (e.g. 24) located within a chest cavity of the patient (e.g. “sensing device 24 may be implanted within a chest cavity of patient 12.”, para. [0064]) in order to gather relevant data related to the patient’s activity level (e.g. para. [0060], [0064]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sahasrabudhe to include locating the sensor within a chest cavity of the patient, as taught by Gerber, in order to gather relevant data related to the patient’s activity level (e.g. ‘470, para. [0064]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 61 and 74 have been considered. The remarks made within the advisory mailed 10/1/2025 were in regards to the amendment filed on 2/24/2025 which was the most recent entered amendment when the advisory was mailed 10/1/2025. The amendment filed on 12/11/2025 removed the “non-posture” language making the claims similar in form to the amendment filed on 6/17/2024. Sahasrabudhe discloses tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, see para. [0018], [0267], [0270], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping on the accelerometer within the IMD and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture. Sahasrabudhe discloses tapping an accelerometer when a particular posture state has been assumed, see para. [0018], [0267], [0270], [0275], therefore the “first distinct action” is tapping “motion” on the accelerometer within the IMD with a finger “body part” and the “second distinct action” is assuming the posture using a torso and/or legs “different motion and body part”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L GHAND whose telephone number is (571)270-5844. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30AM - 3:30PM ET.
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, JENNIFER MCDONALD can be reached on (571)270-3061. 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.
/JENNIFER L GHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796