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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/11/2025 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
In claim 1, the claim limitation “a means for transferring” that use the word “means” is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. In para "[0055]", the specification states: means for transferring an ingredient out of a container disposed in a housing comprise a pressurizing pump whose outlet is fluidically connected with the interior of said container. Therefore, the “means for transferring” is construed as a pressurizing pump.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 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 1, 3, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN106264148) in view of Ameye (US9782033) and in further view of Doelman (US20120205397) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches an appliance for making a cocktail individually, said appliance comprising:
a funnel removably mounted on the base, under the housing outlets,
and comprising an outlet orifice ([0079] mixing bin 4 shape of a funnel with an outlet 41 at the bottom, [0103] top of mixing chamber 4 in threaded connection with housing 5, to be disassembled),
a shutter that is movable between a closed position and an open position in which it, respectively, tightly closes and leaves at least partially free, the outlet orifice of the funnel ([0082] plug 32 and the stirring rod 31 are arranged up and down in the mixing chamber 4, and the plug 32 is movable to seal the liquid outlet 41),
an actuator mechanically coupled to the shutter to displace it between said open and closed positions ([0069] driving motor 33 drives the connecting rod 342 to rotate through the coupling 341, and the stirring rod 31 performs a rotating stirring action, and at the same time drives the plug 32 to perform lifting and shifting actions),
an emulsifier comprising an emulsifying shaft (342) of axis X comprising a bottom end disposed inside the funnel and a top end (Fig. 2 stirring rod 31 within mixing bin 4),
a motor driving the emulsifier shaft (342) in rotation about the axis X ([0069] connecting rod 342 to rotate through the coupling 341, and the stirring rod 31 performs a rotating stirring action),
comprising a drive shaft (341) mechanically coupled to the top end of the emulsifier shaft ([0069] connecting rod 342 to rotate through the coupling 341, and the stirring rod 31 performs a rotating stirring action),
the emulsifier shaft (342) being mounted to be movable in translation along its axis so as to form the shutter ([0082] plug 32 and the stirring rod 31 are arranged up and down in the mixing chamber 4, and the plug 32 is movable to seal the liquid outlet 41),
wherein the emulsifier shaft (342) bears a bearing of axis X (Annotated Fig. 2) in which, in the closed position only, the bottom end of the emulsifier shaft is guided in rotation ([0082] stirring rod rotates, closing outlet 41).
Li is silent on a base comprising a storage rack defining a plurality of housings, each housing being configured to receive a respective removable container containing a liquid ingredient of said drink, and being provided with a housing outlet; means for transferring into the funnel, through the housing outlets of said housings, ingredients contained in the containers housed in said housings; a control module capable of controlling, according to a desired composition of said cocktail, drive motor, the means for transferring, and the actuator, wherein said means comprise, for transferring an ingredient out of a container disposed in a housing, a pressurizing pump having an outlet which is fluidically connected with an interior of said container to pressurize said interior of said container to increase the pressure inside said container to push said ingredient contained in said container through the housing outlet of said housing into the funnel.
PNG
media_image1.png
962
706
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Li
Ameye teaches a base comprising a storage rack defining a plurality of housings (Col. 3 lines 25-30 FIG. 1, the apparatus comprises a plurality of containers 2 each containing one or more ingredients for the nutritional composition),
each housing being configured to receive a respective removable container containing an liquid ingredient of said cocktail (Col. 8 lines 40-45 containers 2 are typically disposable containers in the sense that a container is filled with one or several specific ingredient(s) and is sealed preferably at a factory site),
and being provided with a housing outlet (Col. 9 lines 15-20 socket 11 typically comprises a sharp element (not shown) which breaks open the seal of the container 2 when the container 2 is arranged in the socket 11),
a control module capable of controlling, according to a desired composition of said cocktail, drive motor, the means for transferring, and the actuator (Col. 10 lines 20-35 controller 7 is comprised in the apparatus—or the apparatus is connected to a controller 7. The controller 7 is adapted to control the metered amounts of ingredients delivered individually from the containers by the delivery devices 3 in response to the input from the user)
Li and Ameye are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li to incorporate the teachings of Ameye to have a plurality of housings with outlets, a means of transferring and a controller to be able to have a plurality of ingredients in metered amounts to tailor the drink to a specific user (Ameye Col. 8 lines 30-40).
PNG
media_image2.png
730
552
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Ameye
Li and Ameye are silent on means for transferring into the funnel, through the housing outlets of said housings, ingredients contained in the containers housed in said housings, wherein said means comprise, for transferring an ingredient out of a container disposed in a housing, a pressurizing pump having an outlet which is fluidically connected with an interior of said container to inject air inside said container to increase the pressure inside said container to push said ingredient contained in said container through the housing outlet of said housing, into the funnel.
Doelman teaches means for transferring into the funnel (30), through the housing outlets (64) of said housings (10), ingredients ([0097] liquid product is stored in bag 49) contained in the containers (32) housed in said housings (10), wherein said means comprise, for transferring an ingredient ([0097] liquid product]) out of a container (32) disposed in a housing (10), a pressurizing pump (34) having an outlet (200) which is fluidically connected with an interior of said container (32) to inject air inside said container ([0099] air pump 34 provides air pressure to bag 49 via chamber port 60) to increase the pressure inside said container (32) to push ([0099] pushes the liquid product through tube 64 to nozzle 30) said ingredient ([0097] liquid) contained in said container (32) through the housing outlet (64) of said housing (10), into the funnel (30).
PNG
media_image3.png
586
906
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Doelman
Li, Ameye, and Doelman are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li and Ameye to incorporate the teachings of Doelman to means for transferring be a pump, causing pressure to increase in the container in order to expel or deliver a beverage in a sanitary manner while being able to control the flow rate of the beverage (Doelman [0003]).
Regarding claim 3, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, and Li teaches wherein the bottom end of the emulsifier shaft bears a closing plug designed to, in the closed position, enter into the outlet orifice of the funnel ([0082] plug 32 and the stirring rod 31 are arranged up and down in the mixing chamber 4, and the plug 32 is movable to seal the liquid outlet 41) but is silent on to a depth greater than 1 mm. Li and Chen teach the claimed invention except for the plug entering an outlet at a depth greater than 1 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to have the plug entering an outlet at a depth greater than 1 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 12, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, and Li teaches in which the emulsifier shaft (342) forming the shutter has a constant length along the axis X (Fig. 2)
Regarding claim 13, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach a method to make a cocktail with an appliance as claimed in claim 1, and Li teaches said method comprising: lowering the emulsifier shaft to the closed position of the outlet orifice of the funnel ([0090] lowering plug 32 of shaft 342 to a closed position); transferring determined quantities said ingredients, according to a recipe, to the funnel ([0090] delivering ingredients to mixing bin 4); activating the emulsifier to obtain an emulsified mixture ([0090] stirring rod rotates and stirs); opening the outlet orifice for said emulsified mixture to flow into a glass ([0090] discharging liquid).
Claims 4 and 7-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN106264148), Ameye (US9782033), and Doelman (US20120205397) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Suzuki (JP5118463) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 4, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, but are silent wherein the bottom end of the emulsifier shaft bears fins designed to limit, in the open position, the formation of eddies in the flow, through the outlet orifice of the funnel, of a mixture of ingredients contained in the funnel.
Suzuki teaches wherein the bottom end of the emulsifier shaft (51) bears fins (52) designed to limit, in the open position, the formation of eddies in the flow, through the outlet orifice (31) of the funnel (12), of a mixture of ingredients contained in the funnel (rotation of stirring blade body 15, having shaft 51 and fin 52 to mix ingredients wherein the open position, being a stopped position, allows flow od mixed beverage).
Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Suzuki are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Suzuki to have fins at the end of the stirrer in order to allow liquid to be poured through the outlet of the funnel (Suzuki).
Regarding claim 7, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, Li teaches wherein the funnel comprises a bowl (4) but is silent on wherein the funnel comprises a cover for closing the bowl, fixed removably to the bowl and passed through by an opening, the top end of the emulsifier shaft being housed, at least partially, in the opening regardless of the position of the emulsifier shaft between the closed position and the open position, the opening having a form that substantially complements said top end.
Suzuki teach wherein the funnel comprises and a cover (13) for closing the bowl (12), fixed removably to the bowl ([0028]The lid 13 is detachably attached to the mixing bowl body 12) and passed through by an opening (43) the top end of the emulsifier shaft (51) being housed, at least partially, in the opening (43) regardless of the position of the emulsifier shaft between the closed position and the open position ([0029] The upper end side of the rotary shaft 51 is rotatably borne by an upper bearing part 43 of the lid body 13, the lower end side of the rotary shaft 51 is detachably and rotatably borne by a lower bearing part 32 of the outflow port 31, and a part of the stirring blade 52 is disposed to enter the outflow port 31), the opening (43) having a form that substantially complements said top end ([0028] an upper bearing part 43 for bearing the stirring blade body 15 is provided at the center of the lid body 13).
It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Suzuki to have a cover removably fixed to a bowl, with the emulsifier through the opening in order to cover an opening in the upper surface of the mixing bowl body (Suzuki [0028]).
Regarding claim 8, Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Suzuki teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 7, but Li, Ameye, and Doelman are silent on wherein the cover defines pillars, which, in an assembled position of the funnel, are each inserted into a housing outlet of a respective housing, and fluidically connected with the interior of a container housed in said housing, through a drain valve of said container.
Suzuki teaches wherein the cover (13) defines pillars (41) , which, in an assembled position of the funnel (12), are each inserted into a housing outlet of a respective housing (liquid supply port 41 attached to liquid supply device), and fluidically connected with the interior of a container housed in said housing, through a drain valve of said container ([0028] a liquid supply port 41 to which hot water or cold water is supplied from a liquid supply device is formed so as to face the upper side of the liquid supply receiving portion 34, and on the other end side of the lid 13).
It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Suzuki to have pillars in the cover in order to supply water or other ingredients to the mixing bowl (Suzuki [0028]).
Regarding claim 9, Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Suzuki teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 8, and Li teaches wherein the bowl (4) comprises a runner and the base comprises a rail, extending parallel to the axis of said pillars, designed to guide, by cooperation with the runner, the insertion of the pillars in the respective housing outlets ([0103] the top of the mixing chamber 4 is provided with a threaded mounting ring 42, and the casing 5 is provided with a threaded groove 51 for the mounting ring 42 to be threadedly suspended).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li Li (CN106264148), Ameye (US9782033), and Doelman (US20120205397) as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Schieweg (US7641137).
Regarding claim 5, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 3, but are silent on comprising a bearing having an external ring, said external ring being held in the skirt of the closing plug, the friction of the closing plug on the funnel and the friction of the skirt on the external ring being suitable to, in the closed position, immobilize the external ring with respect to the funnel.
Schieweg teaches comprising bearing (42) having an external ring (43), said external ring being of the closing plug (Col. 5 lines 60-67 Fig. 3 double rolling bearing 42 is supported on the step 41, the bearings being spaced from each other by an outside spacer ring 43. Arranged radially inwardly from the spacer ring 43 between the bearings of the double rolling bearing 42 is a conveyor screw 44), the friction of the closing plug on the funnel and the friction of the skirt on the external ring being suitable to, in the closed position, immobilize the external ring with respect to the funnel (Col. 3 lines 40-50 bearing block accommodates either plain or rolling bearings for supporting the shaft; a double-rolling bearing is particularly maintenance-friendly and has a long bearing service life. By virtue of the provision of only a small frictional gap between the bearing block and the agitator tool, the grinding medium is effectively prevented from passing therethrough).
PNG
media_image4.png
710
924
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Schieweg
Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Schieweg are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Schieweg to have a rolling bearing that closes an opening through friction so that grinding medium is prevented from passing through an opening (Schieweg Col. 3 lines 45-50).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN106264148), Ameye (US9782033), and Doelman (US20120205397) as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Zhou (CN 202775970) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 6, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 3, but are silent on wherein the emulsifier shaft is coupled in translation, along the axis of the emulsifier shaft, with the drive shaft by means of an attachment that can be deactivated by a pull on the emulsifier shaft along its axis.
PNG
media_image5.png
512
754
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Figs. 5 and 6 of Zhou
Zhou teaches wherein the emulsifier shaft (44) is coupled in translation, along the axis of the emulsifier shaft, with the drive shaft (42) by means of an attachment that can be deactivated by a pull on the emulsifier shaft along its axis ([0043] Figs. 5 and 6, a stirrer 44 is provided at the lower end of the stirring shaft 42, and the stirrer 44 and the stirring shaft 42 are detachably connected through magnetic force).
Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Zhou are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Zhou to have a drive shaft that can be removed in order to allow for quick replacement of a mixer (Zhou [0043]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN106264148), Ameye (US9782033), and Doelman (US20120205397) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Noth (US 10740583).
Regarding claim 10, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, but are silent on comprising an electronic circuit board and, for each housing, an antenna suitable for contactlessly reading a marker of a container disposed in said housing, said antenna being fixed onto a substrate linked to the electronic circuit board by a hinge.
PNG
media_image6.png
498
474
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Noth
Noth teaches comprising an electronic circuit board and, for each housing (Col. 16 lines 60-67 processing subsystem 50 being an integrated circuit), an antenna suitable for contactlessly reading a marker of a container disposed in said housing, said antenna being fixed onto a substrate linked to the electronic circuit board by a hinge (Col. 29 lines 10-25 attachment 94 for attachment to machine 4 having a code 74 arranged on a surface, Fig. 6 shown to have hinge like flaps).
Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Noth are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Noth to have a circuit and an antenna on a substrate so that a clean or maintenance operation can be determined (Noth Col. 29 lines 25-35).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN106264148), Ameye (US9782033), and Doelman (US20120205397) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Dooley (US20130032611).
Regarding claim 11, Li, Ameye, and Doelman teach the appliance as claimed in the claim 1, but are silent on each housing comprising a pressurizing inlet connected, by a duct, to the outlet of a respective pressurizing pump, and a housing outlet through which the ingredient taken from the container enters into the funnel
PNG
media_image7.png
744
500
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. 18a of Dooley
PNG
media_image8.png
728
566
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Fig. 18b of Dooley
Dooley teaches each housing (Figs 18A and 18B, 80) comprising a pressurizing inlet connected (opening of inlet tube 78), by a duct (78), to the outlet (opening of pump 8 covered by flapper 77) of a respective pressurizing pump (8), and a housing outlet (79 of housing 80) through which the ingredient (82) taken from the container enters into the funnel (5).
Li, Ameye, Doelman, and Dooley are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of drink making and mixing machines. It would have been obvious to have modified Li, Ameye, and Doelman to incorporate the teachings of Dooley to have the housing comprising a pressurizing inlet connected to the pump and an outlet through which the ingredient enter into a funnel in order to be able to let the ingredient, such as a liquid, be passed through heating elements before entering the funnel, enabling effective mixing of ingredients in the funnel (Dooley [0138]). Dooley only teaches one housing, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to have a pressurizing inlet and a housing outlet in each of a plurality of housings, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the Remarks, filed 6/10/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under Li (CN106264148) in view of Ameye (US9782033) and in further view of Green (US20050188854) have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, Applicant's amendment necessitated a new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action, wherein the new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Li (CN106264148) in view of Ameye (US9782033) and in further view of Doelman (US20120205397).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 11/5/2025
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761