DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This communication is in response to the amendment filed 12/29/25. Claims 1, and 3-21 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/25 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections of claims 1, and 3-21 are 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the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), are hereby withdrawn based on the amendments filed on 12/29/25.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-14 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelissier et al (US 20170105701 A1) in view of Baron et al (US 20070206086 A1), and in further view of Amble et al (US 20150035959 A1)
Claims 1, 3-14 Pelissier teaches an apparatus for providing assistance by a remote operator to a local operator of a medical imaging device disposed in a medical imaging device bay via a communication link from a remote service center to the medical imaging device bay, the apparatus comprising:
a workstation disposed in the remote service center including at least one workstation display; (Fig. 1(100B); par. 61, par. 71- remote interface 118 is a general purpose device configured by software to allow a remote expert to review an ultrasound procedure and provide feedback as described herein. For example, remote interface device 118 may comprise a smartphone, tablet, laptop, or personal computer configured by software to perform the functions of remote interface 118; par. 78- graphical display that may be produced at a remote interface device 118. The display includes ultrasound image 402 and video stream 404 as well as controls that may be used by an expert to provide direction and feedback to a user.)
at least one electronic processor programmed to:
mirror a display of an imaging device controller of the medical imaging device at the at least one workstation display by receiving a screen mirroring data stream sent to the workstation from the imaging device controller and presenting the screen mirroring data stream at the workstation as a shared screen of the imaging device controller generated from the screen mirroring data stream ( par. 27- a camera operable to generate a video stream wherein the data interface is configured to transmit the video stream from the camera to the remote interface; par. 68: Patient imaging device 104 transmits the video stream to local user interface device 102. Local user interface device 102 may display the ultrasound imaging data and/or video stream from patient imaging device 104 to the operator on a display 102A; par. 70- When remote feedback is desired apparatus 100A is caused to transmit one or both of the ultrasound imaging data and the video stream through a data communication network 106 to remote apparatus 100B.)
present video, on the at least one workstation display, of the medical imaging device acquired by a camera disposed in the medical imaging device bay; (Fig. 3: the camera which is part of the local user interface captures video stream of the local operator operating the imaging device; par. 27- a camera operable to generate a video stream wherein the data interface is configured to transmit the video stream from the camera to the remote interface; par. 68: Patient imaging device 104 transmits the video stream to local user interface device 102. Local user interface device 102 may display the ultrasound imaging data and/or video stream from patient imaging device 104 to the operator on a display 102A; par. 77- patient image device 104 comprises a digital camera integrated into local user interface device 102; and a video stream 404 captured by camera 104 are displayed simultaneously on display 102A of local user interface device 102; )
Pelissier further discloses that the local imaging operator may reach out to an expert for remote assistance (par. 69) but does not expressly disclose:
generate a timeline of a schedule of the remote operator, wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; and
control a display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline.
Baron discloses a system and method for users to schedule time with an expert comprising:
generate a timeline of a schedule of the expert (i.e. remote operator), wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; (Fig. 9; par. 75), wherein the mirroring of the display of the imaging device controller is performed based on the generated timeline of the schedule of the remote operator; (par. 27-28: live on-screen video expert interaction with screen sharing is based on the availability of the expert; par. 39-41: whatever currently appears on the screen of the customer terminal 14 is referred to as the "presentation screen." In one embodiment, the presentation screen also appears on the expert's screen so that the expert and customer both see the same display at the same [0040]; Upon receiving the request, a peer-to-peer session 52 is established between the customer terminal and the expert terminal as shown in FIG. 3c. The expert may push out an initial presentation screen 54 to the customer terminal on the established peer-to-peer link 52. The initial presentation screen 54 is then displayed on the customer terminal 14. In addition, a video link and audio link are established between the customer and expert terminals. In the illustrated embodiment, a real-time video image 56 of the expert 18 is displayed on the screen of the customer terminal, while a real-time video image of the customer 16 is displayed on the screen of the expert. [0041])
control a display device to display the generated timeline. (Fig. 14, par. 75- a customer 16 selects an expert 18 with him to schedule a session. FIG. 13 illustrates an exemplary selected expert screen shot 1300, which is described in further detail below. In block 915, the experts' available times for appointments are displayed. FIG. 14 illustrates an exemplary expert schedule screen shot 1400, which is described in further detail below. In block 920, the customer 16 selects an appointment from the expert's available times for a session)
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Pelissier with the teaching of Baron to generate a timeline of a schedule of the remote operator, wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; and control a display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline, and to allow screen sharing based on the availability of the remote expert. One would have been motivated to include this feature to ensure that the local operator is able to access the support and training required to provide proper patient care.
Claim 1 has been further amended to recite:
wherein the mirrored display of the imaging device controller includes at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device.
Pelissier and Baron do not expressly disclose, but Amble discloses displaying at least one configuration settings screen for adjusting the settings of the imaging device. (Figs. 12-13; par. 123-127: it is preferable to present all of the imagery and text displayed on the ultrasonic imaging machine's display screen so that the collaborating specialist can see the ultrasonic imagining machines settings, etc., just as they are seen by the technician conducting the examination. par. 133-134: the frame 1002 still displays the entire screen view from the ultrasonic imaging machine. This again gives the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image.) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system and method of Pelissier and Baron in combination to include at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device on the mirroring screen displays. As suggested by Amble, one would have been motivated to include this feature so that the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image. (par. 133)
Claim 15-18 Pelissier teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions for providing assistance by a remote operator to a local operator of a medical imaging device disposed in a medical imaging device bay via a communication link from a remote service center to the medical imaging device bay, the instructions when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform a method of including:
present information pertaining to control of the medical imaging device on a display of an imaging device controller of the medical imaging device; (Fig. 1(100B); par. 61, par. 71- remote interface 118 is a general purpose device configured by software to allow a remote expert to review an ultrasound procedure and provide feedback as described herein. For example, remote interface device 118 may comprise a smartphone, tablet, laptop, or personal computer configured by software to perform the functions of remote interface 118; par. 78- graphical display that may be produced at a remote interface device 118. The display includes ultrasound image 402 and video stream 404 as well as controls that may be used by an expert to provide direction and feedback to a user.)
mirroring the display of the imaging device controller of the medical imaging device at a workstation disposed in the remote service center, wherein the workstation includes at least one workstation display, and; ( par. 27- a camera operable to generate a video stream wherein the data interface is configured to transmit the video stream from the camera to the remote interface; par. 68: Patient imaging device 104 transmits the video stream to local user interface device 102. Local user interface device 102 may display the ultrasound imaging data and/or video stream from patient imaging device 104 to the operator on a display 102A; par. 70- When remote feedback is desired apparatus 100A is caused to transmit one or both of the ultrasound imaging data and the video stream through a data communication network 106 to remote apparatus 100B.)
presenting, on the at least one workstation display, video of the medical imaging device acquired by a camera disposed in the medical imaging device bay; (the camera which is part of the local user interface captures video stream of the local operator operating the imaging device; par. 27- a camera operable to generate a video stream wherein the data interface is configured to transmit the video stream from the camera to the remote interface; par. 68: Patient imaging device 104 transmits the video stream to local user interface device 102. Local user interface device 102 may display the ultrasound imaging data and/or video stream from patient imaging device 104 to the operator on a display 102A; par. 77- patient image device 104 comprises a digital camera integrated into local user interface device 102; and a video stream 404 captured by camera 104 are displayed simultaneously on display 102A of local user interface device 102)
Pelissier further discloses that the local imaging operator may reach out to an expert for remote assistance (par. 69) but does not expressly disclose:
generate a timeline of a schedule of the remote operator, wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; and controlling a display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline; and the controlling of the display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline includes controlling display devices in the respective medical imaging device bays to display the generated timeline on each respective display device.
Baron discloses a system and method for users to schedule time with an expert comprising:
generate a timeline of a schedule of the expert (i.e. remote operator), wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; and (Fig. 9; par. 75);
wherein the mirroring of the display of the imaging device controller is performed based on the generated timeline of the schedule of the remote operator; (par. 27-28: live on-screen video expert interaction with screen sharing is based on the availability of the expert; par. 39-41: whatever currently appears on the screen of the customer terminal 14 is referred to as the "presentation screen." In one embodiment, the presentation screen also appears on the expert's screen so that the expert and customer both see the same display at the same [0040]; Upon receiving the request, a peer-to-peer session 52 is established between the customer terminal and the expert terminal as shown in FIG. 3c. The expert may push out an initial presentation screen 54 to the customer terminal on the established peer-to-peer link 52. The initial presentation screen 54 is then displayed on the customer terminal 14. In addition, a video link and audio link are established between the customer and expert terminals. In the illustrated embodiment, a real-time video image 56 of the expert 18 is displayed on the screen of the customer terminal, while a real-time video image of the customer 16 is displayed on the screen of the expert. [0041])
controlling a display device to display the generated timeline. (Fig. 14, par. 75- a customer 16 selects an expert 18 with him to schedule a session. FIG. 13 illustrates an exemplary selected expert screen shot 1300, which is described in further detail below. In block 915, the experts' available times for appointments are displayed. FIG. 14 illustrates an exemplary expert schedule screen shot 1400, which is described in further detail below. In block 920, the customer 16 selects an appointment from the expert's available times for a session)
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Pelissier with the teaching of Baron to include generating a timeline of a schedule of the remote operator, wherein the generated timeline includes a plurality of time slots and an engagement status of the remote operator for each time slot; and controlling a display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline; wherein the method provides assistance by the remote operator to a plurality of local operators including said local operator, each local operator being a local operator of a respective medical imaging device disposed in a respective medical imaging device bay, and the controlling of the display device in the medical imaging device bay to display the generated timeline includes controlling display devices in the respective medical imaging device bays to display the generated timeline on each respective display device.
One would have been motivated to include this feature to ensure that the local operator is able to access the support and training required to provide proper patient care.
Claim 15 has been further amended to recite:
wherein the mirrored display of the imaging device controller includes at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device.
Pelissier and Baron do not expressly disclose, but Amble discloses displaying at least on configuration settings screen for adjusting the settings of the imaging device. (Figs. 12-13; par. 123-127: it is preferable to present all of the imagery and text displayed on the ultrasonic imaging machine's display screen so that the collaborating specialist can see the ultrasonic imagining machines settings, etc., just as they are seen by the technician conducting the examination. par. 133-134: the frame 1002 still displays the entire screen view from the ultrasonic imaging machine. This again gives the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image.) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system and method of Pelissier and Baron in combination to include at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device on the mirroring screen displays. As suggested by Amble, one would have been motivated to include this feature so that the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image. (par. 133)
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelissier et al (US 20170105701 A1) in view of Baron et al (US 20070206086 A1), and Amble as applied to claims 1 and 15 and in further view of Hader (US 20210093285 A1).
Claim 19 The limitations of claim 19 are substantially similar to claims 1 and 15. As such the limitations are addressed by the rejections of claims 1 and 15, which are incorporated herein.
Claim 19 further recites:
receiving at least one request from a local operator at the medical imaging device bay, the at least one request indicating a need for assistance at a requested time, wherein the at least one request from the local operator is a request for assistance in performing injection of a contrast agent, or a request for assistance after a contrast agent is injected; and
updating the timeline based on the requested time of the at least one request.
Pelissier discloses: receiving at least one request from a local operator at the medical imaging device bay, the at least one request indicating a need for assistance at a requested time, (par. 69).
Pelissier does not disclose, but Baron discloses updating the timeline based on the requested time of the at least one request. (Fig. 9; Fig. 14-16; appointment added to calendar) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Pelissier with the teaching of Baron. One would have been motivated to include this feature to ensure that the local operator is able to access the support and training required to provide proper patient care.
Pelissier and Baron do not expressly disclose, but Amble discloses displaying at least on configuration settings screen for adjusting the settings of the imaging device. (Figs. 12-13; par. 123-127: it is preferable to present all of the imagery and text displayed on the ultrasonic imaging machine's display screen so that the collaborating specialist can see the ultrasonic imagining machines settings, etc., just as they are seen by the technician conducting the examination. par. 133-134: the frame 1002 still displays the entire screen view from the ultrasonic imaging machine. This again gives the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image.) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system and method of Pelissier and Baron in combination to include at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device on the mirroring screen displays. As suggested by Amble, one would have been motivated to include this feature so that the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image. (par. 133)
Pelissier , Baron, and Amble do not disclose but Hader teaches wherein the at least one request from the local operator is a request for assistance in performing injection of a contrast agent, or a request for assistance after a contrast agent is injected. (par. 67- medical/technical expert knowledge does not need to be locally present at the site of a medical imaging procedure but may advantageously be provided remotely at the requested time…; par. 83, par. 146-matching local operators and expert operators based upon the need at a desired time: Local processing units 23, 33 may further comprise a scheduling unit 26, 36 arranged for scheduling, coordinating or monitoring medical imaging procedures IMP to be performed on any imaging modalities of the respective medical facility 20, 30 in the course of a working shift, a day or a week ahead; par. 155- 156 Computing unit further comprises a matching unit 12 adapted for matching data on the medical imaging procedure with data on the expert operator and/or the local operator. The computing unit further comprises an assigning unit 13 adapted to assign at least one expert operator and/or local operator to a medical imaging procedure based on the matching… computing unit 10 may be activated on a request-base by any of processing units 23, 33; par. 103)
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system/method of Pelissier , Baron, and Amble in combination with the teaching of Hader with the motivation of ensuring operator availability and a flexible and on-demand allocation of technical expert knowledge as needed for conducting medical imaging procedures. (Hader: par. 8)
Claims 20 Pelissier does not disclose Baron discloses updating the timeline with the at least one request at the time slot corresponding to the requested time. (Fig. 9; Fig. 14-16; appointment added to calendar) At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Pelissier with the teaching of Baron. One would have been motivated to include this feature to ensure that the local operator is able to access the support and training required to provide proper patient care.
Pelissier , Baron, and Amble in combination do not disclose generating and transmitting a message to the local operator who made the request that the requested time is not available when the requested time is not available. Hader teaches generating and transmitting a message to the local operator who made the request that the requested time is not available when the requested time is not available. (par. 81; par. 163-there may likewise be imaging procedures with no expert operator assigned. The imaging procedures do not indicate an expert operator, accordingly. However, these imaging procedures do have a local operator assigned, which may likewise be indicated and recorded in the schedule SCH)
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the system/method of Pelissier, Baron, and Amble in combination with the teaching of Hader with the motivation of making users aware of issues regarding expert operator availability, and providing a flexible and on-demand allocation of technical expert knowledge when needed for conducting medical imaging procedures. (Hader: par. 8)
Claim 21 Pelissier , Baron, and Amble in combination disclose a method and system in which a user may request/receive remote assistance for medical support and use of imaging devices, as explained in the rejection of claim 19.
Pelissier , Baron, and Amble in combination do not disclose but Hader discloses that imaging device operators (i.e. local operator) is commonly responsible for contrast administration, patient related handling and all patient interaction. (par. 103) The Hader reference discloses that there is a need for a system for providing real-time medical and/or technical expert operator guidance and/or control by identifying an expert operator well-fitted to the requested imaging procedure, irrespective of the location of the expert operator or the medical imaging modality used for the imaging procedure. (par. 83) .
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system/method of Reyes and Schweitzer in combination with the teaching of Hader with the motivation of ensuring operator availability and a flexible and on-demand allocation of technical expert knowledge as needed for conducting medical imaging procedures. (Hader: par. 8)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/25 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
(A) Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 112(b), the claim rejections have been withdrawn due to the claim amendments filed on 12/29/25.
(B) Applicant argues that Pelssier, Barron and Amble do not disclose mirroring a display; a mirrored display including at least one configuration display for adjusting configuration settings of the medical imaging device; generating a timeline of a schedule of the remote operator; the mirroring being performed based on the generated timeline of the schedule of the remote operator.
The examiner disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
The examiner disagrees that Pelissier reference does not disclose mirroring. The reference discloses displaying the screen of the imaging device (e.g. sonogram) and further discloses a camera which captures the sonogram process and displays this image on a display of the local user interface device. (Fig. 3, par. 27- camera operable to generate a video stream wherein the data interface is configured to transmit the video stream from the camera to the remote interface; Par. 77- patient image device 104 comprises a digital camera integrated into local user interface device 102. An ultrasound image 402 captured by probe 103 and a video stream 404 captured by camera 104 are displayed simultaneously on display 102A of local user interface device 102.; Fig. 4, par. 78- a graphical display that may be produced at a remote interface device 118. The display includes ultrasound image 402 and video stream 404 as well as controls that may be used by an expert to provide direction.)
Pelissier further discloses receiving assistance from an expert (par. 77-78), but the Baron reference has been relied upon to disclose generating a timeline of a remote operator (i.e. the remote individual providing assistance). (Baron: Fig. 9; par. 27-28-remote expert; par. 39-41-presenting a schedule of the availability of the remote individual providing assistance; par. 75-displaying and allowing the person needing assistance to contact the remote individual providing assistance: exemplary selected expert screen shot 1300, which is described in further detail below. In block 915, the experts' available times for appointments are displayed.)
Pelissier and Baron in combination do not disclose, but Amble discloses displaying at least one configuration settings screen for adjusting the settings of the imaging device. (Figs. 12-13; par. 123-127: it is preferable to present all of the imagery and text displayed on the ultrasonic imaging machine's display screen so that the collaborating specialist can see the ultrasonic imagining machines settings, etc., just as they are seen by the technician conducting the examination. par. 133-134: the frame 1002 still displays the entire screen view from the ultrasonic imaging machine. This again gives the reviewer context as to the machine settings, etc. that were being used to obtain the displayed image.)
It is this combination of the references has been relied upon to address the claim limitations. The test for obviousness is not that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
(B) Applicant argues that the proposed combination relies on impermissible hindsight, and that there is not reason to combine the applied references.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, the examiner has provided motivation to combine the references using knowledge that was available to one ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applications effective filing date. Moreover, with the addition of the Amble reference, the examiner has provided motivation from the Amble reference to further modify the Pelissier and Baron combination to include the additional feature.
Therefore, the applied combination of references is proper.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rachel L Porter whose telephone number is (571)272-6775. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10-6:30.
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, Shahid Merchant can be reached on 571-270-1360. 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.
/Rachel L. Porter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626