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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/05/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 and 11 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), regards as the invention.
As to Claims 1 and 11, the instant claims recite the phrase “not inline with the two or more analyzers” (line 14 of claim 1, line 20 of claim 11). It is vague/unclear as to what is meant by the pump being “not inline” with the analyzers. Does the “inline” refer to a physical arrangement (i.e., not physically arranged inline with the analyzers)? Or does it refer to a fluid communication line with the analyzers (i.e., not in fluid communication with the analyzers)? Or does both? As claimed, the aforementioned limitation only is reciting the pump arranged upstream of the analyzers and to be used to draw samples into the individual sampling tubes, and thus does not appear to include how it is used with the analyzers if any.
Due to claim dependency, all remaining dependent claims are also rejected.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 9, 11, 15 – 18, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 06-317508 A to Maccallum Taber K et al. (hereinafter “Maccallum”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,090,392 to Smith et al. (hereinafter “Smith”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0137283 A1 to Giandomenico et al. (hereinafter “Giandomenico”).
Regarding Claim 1, as best understood, Maccallum teaches an airborne molecular contamination (AMC) monitoring apparatus (see abstract section at page 2, paragraphs [0008] at page 9 and [0013], [0016] – [0018] at page 10 and Fig. 1, describing an air analysis system used for measuring concentrations of different components/contaminants of an environment, hence reading on the invention as claimed) comprising:
a manifold (see manifold 22, Fig. 1, see abstract at page 2, see paragraphs [0022] at page 11 and [0031] at page 12 describing the main sample manifold 22) including a plurality of outlets fluidly connected to the inlet tube (see plurality of outlets from the manifold 22 that are connected to respective three way valves 19 and to a respective analysis instrument, see arrangement at Fig. 1 and description at page 2);
a sampling tube bus (see the multiple lines feeding the manifold 22 which are fluidly connected with multiple sampling pipes 34 via the three way valve 36, see paragraphs [0028], [0031] at page 12, thus the multiple lines feeding manifold 22 can reasonably be considered as the sampling tube bus) fluidly coupled to the inlet tube (see arrangement at Fig. 1), the sampling tube bus comprising a plurality of individual sampling tubes (see arrangement of Fig. 1 illustrating plurality of lines/pipes feeding the manifold 22 from the side of the sampling pipes 34), each individual sampling tube being fluidly coupled to the inlet tube of the manifold (22) by a multi-way valve (see three way solenoid vales 36 described in abstract section at page 2, see also paragraph [0031] at pages 12 – 13);
two or more analyzers (see analytical instruments 2 – 8, Fig. 1, see abstract at page 2, see paragraphs [0017] – [0019] pages 10 - 11), each fluidly coupled by a valve (see three way solenoid valves 19, Fig. 1, see paragraph [0022] at page 11) to a corresponding one of the plurality of outlets (see arrangement at Fig. 1) of the manifold (22) to analyze the composition of fluid drawn into the manifold through one or more of the plurality of individual sampling tubes (see abstract at page 2 and paragraphs [0017] – [0019] describing the analytical instruments for measuring the concentration of different components such as carbon dioxide, oxygen nitrogen oxides etc.);
a pump fluidly coupled in the manifold (see vacuum manifold 13 connected to pump 15 and which his in fluid communication with the manifold 22 as illustrated at Fig. 1), wherein the pump draws a sample into at least one of the plurality of individual sampling tubes (see arrangement at Fig. 1 which illustrates a pump 15 in communication with the vacuum manifold 13 that draws sample into the sampling tubes).
Even though Maccallum teaches a pump as described above and which is arranged downstream of the analyzers, Maccallum does not explicitly teach the pump fluidly coupled in the manifold upstream of the two or more analyzers and not inline with the two or more analyzers. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the pump 15 and/or the vacuum manifold 13 upstream of the analyzers and not inline with the two or more analyzers, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
In addition, Smith, in the field of automatic gas analyzer system, teaches that it is known to use a pump that is fluidly coupled upstream of detectors and not inline with the detectors (see arrangement at Figs. 1, 2 of Smith illustrating suction pumps 25 – 31 arranged upstream side of analyzer 9, 103 and not inline with the detectors 9, 103 as it is arranged offside from the detectors, see Col. 3, line 63 – Col. 5, line 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange fan/pump upstream of detectors of Smith into Maccallum, in order to efficiently move and direct the sample through the apparatus having multiple inlets.
Maccallum in view of Smith as modified above further teaches;
a control and communication system coupled to the two or more analyzers (see a computer central processing unit 18, Fig. 1 of Maccallum, see paragraph [0024] at pages 11 – 12 of Maccallum and/or see microcomputer system described at Col. 6, line 31 - 42 of Smith).
Even though Maccallum teaches a manifold 22 as described above, Maccallum in view of Smith is silent regarding the design of the manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
In addition, Giandomenico, in the field of lateral manifold for fluid sensors, teaches that it is known to use a manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space (see arrangement at Figs. 4 and 5 and paragraphs [0022] – [0023], [0028] describing a lateral manifold 10 comprising a manifold arm 13 which is considered as the claimed “inlet tube” thus reducing dead space as claimed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the manifold design of Giandomenico into Maccallum in view of Smith in order to minimize the volume of the manifold for a given number of sample ports used (see additional advantages at paragraphs [0014] – [0016]).
Regarding Claim 11, as best understood, Maccallum teaches an environmental monitoring system (see abstract section at page 2, paragraphs [0008] at page 9 and [0013], [0016] – [0018] at page 10, paragraph [0042] at page 15 and Fig. 1, describing an air analysis system used for measuring concentrations of different components/contaminants of an environment, hence reading on the invention as claimed) comprising:
a sampling bus comprising a plurality of sampling tubes (see multiple sampling pipes 34 that can be considered as the claimed sampling bus, see paragraphs [0028], [0031] at page 12), wherein each sampling tube is fluidly coupled to one or more chambers of at least one process equipment module (see for instance multiple components such as filter 37, drying means 38, catalytic converters 44, 48 which can be considered as chambers of a process equipment module as claimed and/or see paragraph [0016] of Maccallum at page 10 describing the air sampling and analysis system consisting of “a plurality of remote locations where sample collection takes place, shown at the bottom of the Figure. Inert plastic (e.g., PTFE) or metal tubing connects the remote site with the analysis facility”, thus it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to recognize the tubing that connects the remote site with the analysis facility as the claimed chamber, in addition see paragraph [0042] of Maccallum describing the use of the invention at a variety of places including a chemical plant to monitor the composition of the air to track leaked chemicals, thus reading on the invention as claimed);
one or more airborne molecular contamination (AMC) apparatuses fluidly coupled to the sampling bus (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating multiple manifolds 22, 23, 24 connected to respective analytical instruments (i.e., 2 - 8, 11, 12, Fig. 1) that detect different types of compositions/contaminants from an environment, see abstract section page 2 and paragraph [0022] at page 11, see also paragraphs [0008] at page 9, [0013], [0016] – [0018] at page 10, paragraph [0042] at page 15, hence reading on the invention as claimed), each airborne contamination apparatuses (Fig. 1) comprising:
a manifold (see manifold 22, Fig. 1, see abstract at page 2, see paragraphs [0022] at page 11 and [0031] at page 12 describing the main sample manifold 22) including a plurality of outlets fluidly connected to the inlet tube (see plurality of outlets from the manifold 22 that are connected to respective three way valves 19 and to a respective analysis instrument, see arrangement at Fig. 1 and description at page 2);
a sampling tube bus (see the multiple lines feeding the manifolds such as manifold 22 which are fluidly connected with multiple sampling pipes 34 via the three way valve 36, see paragraphs [0028], [0031] at page 12, thus the multiple lines feeding manifold 22 can reasonably be considered as the sampling tube bus) fluidly coupled to the inlet tube (see arrangement at Fig. 1), the sampling tube bus comprising a plurality of individual sampling tubes (see arrangement of Fig. 1 illustrating plurality of lines/pipes feeding the manifold 22 from the side of the sampling pipes 34), each individual sampling tube being fluidly coupled to the inlet tube of the manifold (22) by a multi-way valve (see three way solenoid vales 36 described in abstract section at page 2, see also paragraph [0031] at pages 12 – 13);
two or more analyzers (see analytical instruments 2 – 8, Fig. 1, see abstract at page 2, see paragraphs [0017] – [0019] pages 10 - 11), each fluidly coupled by a valve (see three way solenoid valves 19, Fig. 1, see paragraph [0022] at page 11) to a corresponding one of the plurality of outlets (see arrangement at Fig. 1) of the manifold (22) to analyze the composition of fluid drawn into the manifold through one or more of the plurality of individual sampling tubes (see abstract at page 2 and paragraphs [0017] – [0019] describing the analytical instruments for measuring the concentration of different components such as carbon dioxide, oxygen nitrogen oxides etc.);
a pump fluidly coupled in the manifold (see vacuum manifold 13 connected to pump 15 and which his in fluid communication with the manifold 22 as illustrated at Fig. 1), wherein the pump draws a sample into at least one of the plurality of individual sampling tubes (see arrangement at Fig. 1 which illustrates a pump 15 in communication with the vacuum manifold 13 that draws sample into the sampling tubes).
Even though Maccallum teaches a pump as described above and which is arranged downstream of the analyzers, Maccallum does not explicitly teach the pump fluidly coupled in the manifold upstream of the two or more analyzers and not inline with the two or more analyzers. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the pump 15 and/or the vacuum manifold 13 upstream of the analyzers and not inline with the two or more analyzers, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
In addition, Smith, in the field of automatic gas analyzer system, teaches that it is known to use a pump that is fluidly coupled upstream of detectors and not inline with the detectors (see arrangement at Figs. 1, 2 of Smith illustrating suction pumps 25 – 31 arranged upstream side of analyzer 9, 103 and not inline with the detectors 9, 103 as it is arranged offside from the detectors, see Col. 3, line 63 – Col. 5, line 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange fan/pump upstream of detectors of Smith into Maccallum, in order to efficiently move and direct the sample through the apparatus having multiple inlets.
Maccallum in view of Smith as modified above further teaches;
a control and communication system coupled to the two or more analyzers (see a computer central processing unit 18, Fig. 1 of Maccallum, see paragraph [0024] at pages 11 – 12 of Maccallum and/or see microcomputer system described at Col. 6, line 31 - 42 of Smith); and
a remote server communicatively coupled, wirelessly or by wire, to the control and communication system (see a computer central processing unit 18, Fig. 1 of Maccallum, see paragraph [0024] at pages 11 – 12 of Maccallum and/or see microcomputer system described at Col. 6, line 31 - 42 of Smith therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize wired or wireless connection of a server to the control and communication system since it is known in the art of computers and processors that it is common to use wired or wireless connections).
Even though Maccallum teaches a manifold 22 as described above, Maccallum in view of Smith is silent regarding the design of the manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
In addition, Giandomenico, in the field of lateral manifold for fluid sensors, teaches that it is known to use a manifold including an inlet tube that reduces or eliminates dead space (see arrangement at Figs. 4 and 5 and paragraphs [0022] – [0023], [0028] describing a lateral manifold 10 comprising a manifold arm 13 which is considered as the claimed “inlet tube” thus reducing dead space as claimed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the manifold design of Giandomenico into Maccallum in view of Smith in order to minimize the volume of the manifold for a given number of sample ports used (see additional advantages at paragraphs [0014] – [0016]).
Regarding Claim 2, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico as modified above teaches wherein each individual sampling tube is coupled to a chamber of a process equipment station (see for instance multiple components such as filter 37, drying means 38, catalytic converters 44, 48 which can be considered as chambers of a process equipment module as claimed and/or see paragraph [0016] of Maccallum at page 10 describing the air sampling and analysis system consisting of “a plurality of remote locations where sample collection takes place, shown at the bottom of the Figure. Inert plastic (e.g., PTFE) or metal tubing connects the remote site with the analysis facility”, thus it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to recognize the tubing that connects the remote site with the analysis facility as the claimed chamber, in addition see paragraph [0042] of Maccallum describing the use of the invention at a variety of places including a chemical plant to monitor the composition of the air to track leaked chemicals and/or see sample tubes 50 that lead from sample locations 70, Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0002], [0007] of Giandomenico, thus reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claim 3, Maccallum as modified above teaches wherein the each of the two or more analyzers can include an individual or total volatile organic compounds (VOC) detector, an acid compound detector, a base compound detector, a sulfide compound detector, an amine compound detector, an air particle or aerosol count detector, a humidity detector, a temperature detector, a chemical coolant detector, an anion detector, a cation detector, a metal ion detector, or a doping ion detector (see paragraphs [0018] – [0019] at pages 10 – 11 describing the different analytical instruments including sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide etc., hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico as modified above teaches wherein the control and communication system is communicatively coupled, wirelessly or by wire, to a remote server, to the at least one process equipment module, or to both the remote server and the at least one process equipment module (see modification of claim 11 above).
Regarding Claim 15, Maccallum as modified above teaches wherein the at least one process equipment module comprises a plurality of process equipment modules grouped into two or more sets (see for instance multiple components such as filter 37, drying means 38, catalytic converters 44, 48 which can be considered as chambers of a process equipment module of which the sampling pipes 34 are being sampled from, note that the groups can be considered as the components of 37, 38, 44, 48 that are grouped to be routed at each of the different manifolds 22, 23, 24, hence reading on the invention as claimed), each set having its own sampling bus and its own AMC apparatus coupled to the sampling bus (see arrangement at Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 16, Maccallum as modified above teaches wherein the at least one process equipment module comprises a plurality of process equipment modules grouped into two or more sets (see for instance multiple components such as filter 37, drying means 38, catalytic converters 44, 48 which can be considered as chambers of a process equipment module of which the sampling pipes 34 are being sampled from, note that the groups can be considered as the components of 37, 38, 44, 48 that are grouped to be routed at each of the different manifolds 22, 23, 24, hence reading on the invention as claimed), each set having its own sampling bus (see arrangement at Fig. 1), and wherein a single movable AMC apparatus is connected and disconnected from each sampling bus to monitor each set (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating the AMC apparatus which can be connected and disconnected from each sampling bus through the valve arrangement, thus reading on the invention as claimed, note that the components can be moveable as per user’s desire).
Regarding Claim 17, Maccallum as modified above teaches wherein the at least one process equipment module comprises a plurality of process equipment modules, wherein each process equipment module is coupled to a pair of sampling buses and wherein each of the pair of sampling buses is connected to its own environmental monitoring apparatus (see arrangement at Fig. 1 illustrating for instance pair of sampling buses that feed manifold 22 being connected to its own environmental monitoring apparatus i.e., source of the sampling pipes 34 and/or monitoring apparatuses at 2 – 8, Fig. 1, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Regarding Claims 20 and 21, Maccallum as modified above teaches wherein each multi-way valve (36) can be selectively set to direct a sample into the inlet tube (22) or set to vent the sample without directing it into the one or more sampling tubes (see other two connections of the three way solenoid valves 36 that route the sample to other locations, hence reading on the invention as claimed).
Claim 10, 12 – 14, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0174709 A1 to Kim et al. (hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding Claims 10 and 19, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico teach the claimed invention except for further comprising a load port attached to at least one of the one or more AMC apparatuses and fluidly coupled to at least one individual sampling tube of the AMC apparatus to which it is attached.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a system with a load port, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
In addition, Kim, in the field of air sampling carrier and method for analyzing air in a semiconductor process tool, teaches further comprising a load port (load port 41, Fig. 3, see paragraph [0036]) attached to at least one of the one or more AMC apparatuses and fluidly coupled to at least one individual sampling tube of the AMC apparatus to which it is attached (process tools 40, Figs. 1, 3, 6, see paragraph [0029]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a load port arrangement of Kim into Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico in order to improve efficiency of the system by providing convenient structures to load and convey objects during the process such as analysis in a semiconductor process tool.
Regarding Claim 12, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico as modified above teaches the claimed invention except for wherein each process equipment module includes a load port to receive a moveable carrier carrying items being manufactured.
Kim, in the field of air sampling carrier and method for analyzing air in a semiconductor process tool, teaches wherein each process equipment module (process tools 40, Figs. 1, 3, see paragraph [0029]) includes a load port (load port 41, Fig. 3, see paragraph [0036]) to receive a moveable carrier (see carrier 35, Fig. 3, see paragraph [0036]) carrying items being manufactured, so that the items being manufactured can be moved into the at one or more chambers of the process equipment module (see Figs. 1, 3 and 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the process equipment module comprising a load port to receive a moveable carrier carrying items being manufactured of Kim into Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico in order to automatically convey the items being manufactured for further detection. The modification allows faster and effective analysis of air in a semiconductor process tool.
Regarding Claim 13, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico in view of Kim as modified above teaches wherein at least one individual sampling tube is fluidly coupled to each load port to sample the environment inside the movable carrier when the movable carrier is placed on the load port (see inlet tubes 74, Fig. 5, paragraph [0046] of Kim, see modification in claim 12 above).
Regarding Claim 14, Maccallum in view of Smith in view of Giandomenico in view of Kim as modified above teaches wherein individual sampling tubes are adapted to be fluidly coupled to an interface chamber (clean room 46, Fig. 3 of Kim, see paragraphs [0038] – [0040]), a lock load chamber (load lock chamber 47, Fig. 3 of Kim), and a process chamber (process chamber 48, Fig. 3 of Kim) of the process equipment module to sample the environment within each chamber.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 (including all dependent claims therefrom due to claim dependency) are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. However, an updated search will again be made upon Applicant’s response.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form accompanying this office action which includes relevant prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARRIT EYASSU whose telephone number is (571)270-1403. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 9:00AM - 6:00PM.
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, Laura E. Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/MARRIT EYASSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855