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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 28 and 29 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group III (i.e., claims 28 and 29), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on November 3, 2023.
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.
Claims 15, 16, 18-20, 23, 24, 30-32, 35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US Publication 2014/0013909), herein referred to as Carlsson in view of Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279340), Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244), and Inoue et al (US Publication 2017/0341254), herein referred to as Inoue. Regarding claim 15, Carlsson discloses a dust hood device (6) for a power tool (1) having a work-performing means (4), the dust hood device comprising: a lower side (36), a front side (32), a rear side (31), an interior (12, 45, 46; fig. 6) defined at least partially by the front side, lower side and rear side (para. 0035, lines 2-7), a guide element (annotated fig. 6) in the interior, and an extraction nozzle (58) connected to the interior (fig. 6); the lower side having a first opening (bottom slot 46) for collecting dust, a mixture of dust and air formed by the collection of dust guidable in various air flows (indicated by plurality of dashed arrows, annotated fig. 6) through the interior in a direction of the extraction nozzle (58), the first opening (46) extending on the lower side (36) from the rear side (31) toward the front end (para. 0035, lines 3-4) and having a first opening end (annotated fig. 6) ending before the front side (para. 0035, lines 11-14), the first opening being an insertion slot (i.e., the longitudinal slot formed by first opening 46 and corresponding top slot 45; see fig. 1) for the work-performing means (4) so that when the dust hood device (6) is installed on the power tool (fig. 5 depicts dust hood device in a separated condition ready for installation), the rear side (31) faces the work-performing means (4) and the front side (32) faces away from the work-performing means (e.g., figs. 1-4).
PNG
media_image1.png
551
998
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Carlsson fails to specifically disclose the lower side additionally includes a second opening for collecting dust, the various air flows in the interior of the dust hood device separable from one another by the guide element, the second opening is formed by two side channels and a slotted opening located on the lower side between the first opening end and the front side. However, the following teaching is pertinent to these limitations: A. Initially, Carlsson states in para. 0035, lines 11-14, “[a] bottom slot 46 is provided in the bottom surface 36 and runs all the way of the connection member 12 and of the longitudinal passage 45, 46. It is appr. 10 mm wide and could also be interrupted during the connection member 12” [emphasis added]. The word “interrupted” suggests bottom slot (46) may be formed in two sections interrupted by connection member 12, i.e., bottom slot (46) has a first portion configured to receive work-performing means (4) as an insertion slot (generally located in LF, fig. 3) and a second portion located aft of connection member (12) toward front side (32; i.e., generally located in LR, fig. 3). Examiner notes this does not appear to be depicted. B. Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279340) teaches it is known in the art of dust or slurry collecting assemblies to provide a dust hood device (fig. 8) used in conjunction with the blade guard (314) positioned around the work-performing means (306) of a power tool (fig. 3). Baratta teaches the dust hood device includes, on a lower side thereof, at least one first opening (418; para. 0078, lines 2-8) and at least one second opening (392, 394, 396, 412, 414; para. 0078, lines 1-2), the second opening being formed by two side channels (slots 394 and 396 in left vacuum tube 354 and right vacuum tube 358) and a slotted opening (414) located rearward with respect to a cutting direction of the work-performing means (slot 414 is positioned, along with at least one first opening 41) immediately behind the work-performing means (para. 0078, lines 8-14). Additionally, Baratta teaches another embodiment (figs. 20-26) which provides more detail with respect to an air guiding manifold plate (690) of the disclosed dust hood device (604) that directs multiple flows of air in the interior of the dust hood device (para. 0106-0108). Baratta teaches dust hood device has a first opening (in fluid connection with “fourth opening” 704” in manifold to collect dust and slurry from slot through which blade 606 extends and the interior of the blade guard) and a second opening (via first and second vacuum tubes 678 and 680 connected to respective vacuum ports 682 formed in manifold 690 and transverse ports 692 which open into transverse slit 694 and flowing into channel 696). Baratta teaches dust and slurry flow from within blade guard is received within first opening connected to “fourth opening” (704), wherein, according to para. 0108 “[t]he fourth opening flows into a fourth channel in the manifold. The fourth channel extends outwardly away from the blade and upwardly toward the coupling plate 698, after which the flow joins the material flow in the other channels in the vacuum port 670” [emphasis added]. The teaching of Baratta suggests the flows from the different openings are separate as they travel through air guiding manifold plate (690) and coupling plate (698), joining together to form a single flow of dust and slurry in vacuum port (670). Baratta teaches dust and slurry is also received through a second opening (para. 0107) formed by two side channels (678, 680) and a slotted opening (694, 696) located on the lower side between the first opening end and the front side (fig. 25). Baratta states in para. 0081, lines 4-15, “[t]he openings are preferably distributed over the vacuum bar so as to take advantage of the forward or backward motion of the saw. The different openings promote more even flow of the slurry relative to the vacuum bar and conserve vacuum pressure. The high vacuum and low vacuum apertures may alternate between a single large opening and a series of small openings, again followed by a large opening. The actual distribution, configuration and arrangement of the different apertures may be determined by a fluid dynamics computer program based on various input parameters, including available vacuum or suction, viscosity, desired flow rates, and the like.” C. Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244) teaches it is known in the art of dust hood devices for a power tool with work-performing means to provide a first opening (260) and at least one second opening (256, 264) formed as two side channels on either side of the blade (fig. 10). Koegel states in para. 059, “[a]nother embodiment of a tuning fork 240 and a dust cap 244 is illustrated in FIG. 10. The dust cap 244 is configured to attach to the top of the tuning fork 240. The tuning fork 240 has a first prong 248 and a second prong 252. Three openings 256, 260, 264 are defined between the first and second prongs 248, 252. As a saw blade 268 spins, airflow generated by the spinning blade 268 flows through the three openings 256, 260, 264, through the tuning fork, and into the dust cap 244. The airflow urges dust and particulates into the dust cap 244, where the dust and particulates are captured by a vacuum in a manner similar to operation of the dust caps discussed above. In some embodiments, the tuning fork 240 and the dust cap 244 may be integral within the upper guard system.” In yet a further embodiment (i.e., fig. 8), Koegel provides another airflow rib (162) proximate to a first end of the dust hood, providing further suggestion of possible locations for air guiding elements in a dust hood with multiple openings. D. Inoue teaches it is known in the art of dust collecting hoods for work-performing means to provide a dust hood device comprising on a lower side, at least one first opening (62) and at least one second opening (64) for collecting dust (para. 0027-0028), a mixture of dust and air formed by the collection of dust guidable in various air flows through an interior of the dust hood device (fig. 3B) in a direction of an extraction nozzle (66), the various air flows in the interior of the dust hood device separable from one another by at least one guide element (annotated fig. 3B), the at least one first opening serving at least in part as an insertion slot (para. 0027, lines 9-14) for the work-performing means (51) of the power tool, and the at least one second opening (64) is formed by a slotted opening (fig. 2) located rearward with respect to a cutting direction of the work-performing means (fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
424
579
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson with the teaching of Baratta, Koegel and Inoue such that the lower side additional openings in any reasonable configuration, such as a second opening for collecting dust formed by two side channels and a slotted opening located on the lower side between the first opening end and the front side, the various air flows [from the openings] in the interior of the dust hood device separable from one another by a guide element because the prior art teaches it is known to utilize multiple openings with corresponding air paths that are guided within the dust hood to help optimize the collection of dusts, debris and slurry resultant from the cutting operation (Baratta, para. 0081) because the teaching of Inoue suggests “[o]ther cut dusts 90 which have been left undrawn through the [first] opening 62 are drawn together with surrounding air through the air inlet port 64 [i.e., second opening] toward the suction source 67” (Inoue, para. 0039, lines 2-5). Moreover, the aforementioned modification would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention because all claimed elements (i.e., the first and second openings) were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results. In this case, the two channels of the second opening taught by Baratta allow for direct application of vacuum pressure to areas extending along side the first opening to more readily collect dust, debris and slurry not immediately collected by the first opening.
Regarding claim 16, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the guide element extends into the interior of the dust hood device, starting from the lower side of the dust hood device (e.g., as taught by Inoue, annotated fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 18, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes wherein the guide element divides the interior of the dust hood device into a first air channel (Inoue, annotated fig. 3B) and a second air channel (Inoue, annotated fig. 3B). Regarding claim 19, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the second air channel (Inoue, annotated fig. 3B) includes an extraction region (Inoue, annotated fig. 3B), adjacent to the first air channel (see annotated fig. 3B), and a collecting region (annotated fig. 3B) arranged above the lower side of the dust hood device in the interior and below the extraction region (see annotated fig. 3B). Regarding claim 20, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the dust hood device is of a modular construction including two side-by-side halves. However, Inoue teaches the dust hood device (15) is of a modular construction (fig. 3; col. 5, lines 18-20 and lines 36-40) including two side-by-side two halves (64, 66). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Inoue such that the dust hood device as a modular construction including two side-by-side halves in order to facilitate installation of the dust hood device on to the power tool while maintaining tight tolerances and compact size with respect to the work-performing means. Regarding claim 23, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes fails to specifically disclose the extraction nozzle (Carlsson, 58) is designed as a truncated cone. However, Koegel teaches it is known in the art of dust hood devices for a power tool with work-performing means to provide an extraction nozzle (156) formed in the shape of a truncated cone (i.e., extraction nozzle 156 appears to taper towards opening configured to receive vacuum hose 180). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the extraction nozzle of Carlsson with the teaching of Koegel such that the dust hood device is provided with different extraction nozzles in a variety of known, reasonable shapes (i.e., cylindrical or truncated cone) or sizes (i.e., constant diameter or tapering from a larger diameter on one end to a smaller diameter on the other end), including an extraction nozzle designed as a truncated cone, in order to facilitate attachment of the dust hood device to different power tools with vacuum hoses of different diameters. Regarding claim 24, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes at least one metal rail (i.e., “a plate of wear resistant material like stainless steel”) on the lower side for reducing wear (Carlsson, para. 0034, lines 5-7). Regarding claim 30, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the slotted opening (e.g., as taught by Inoue 64) extends perpendicular with respect to the two side channels. As modified, the two side channels extend along the forked portion of the dust hood device of Carlsson so as to be substantially parallel to the cutting plane of the work-performing means (Carlsson 4), and slotted opening (64, taught by Inoue) is perpendicular to the cutting plane. Therefore, slotted opening (64) is perpendicular to the two side channels. Regarding claims 31 and 32, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose the following: In claim 31, the slotted opening extends parallel to an edge of dust hood device where the lower side and the front side meet; and In claim 32, the slotted opening extends fully between the two side channels. However, as noted above, Baratta states in para. 0081, lines 4-15, “[t]he openings are preferably distributed over the vacuum bar so as to take advantage of the forward or backward motion of the saw… The actual distribution, configuration and arrangement of the different apertures may be determined by a fluid dynamics computer program based on various input parameters, including available vacuum or suction, viscosity, desired flow rates, and the like.” This suggests one having an ordinary skill in the art could use computational fluid dynamics software to determine the best location and distribution for the slotted opening taught by Inoue, including a location in which the slotted opening extends parallel to an edge of dust hood device where the lower side and the front side meet (as per claim 31); and the slotted opening extends fully between the two side channels (as per claim 32). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above such that the slotted opening extends parallel to an edge of dust hood device where the lower side and the front side meet (as required by claim 31); and the slotted opening extends fully between the two side channels (as required by claim 32) in order to optimize the vacuuming effect of the dust hood device since it has been held “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 35, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the rear side has two parts (Carlsson, para. 0008, lines 1-5) extending from the lower side on either side of the first opening (45).
Regarding claim 36, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the front side is curved (Carlsson, fig. 6).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson (US Publication 2014/0013909), Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279340), Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244), and Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254) in further view of Fleming (US Patent 2,054,932). Regarding claim 17, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes the guide element (as taught by Inoue, annotated fig. 3B), wherein the guide element follows a profile of the front side (i.e., the guide element is directed upward, away from lower side 36). The modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the guide element is of curved design wherein the guide element follows a profile of an outer wall of the dust hood device extending above the lower side.
However, Fleming teaches it is known in the art of dust hood devices (fig. 4) for a power tool (fig. 3) with a work-performing means (W) to include at least one guide element (partitions 17, 19) is of curved design (fig. 4), wherein the guide element follows a profile of an outer wall (i.e., upper partition 17 follows curved contour of upper wall of hood H along its entire length and at least distal end of lower partition 19 follows curved contour of lower wall of hood H) of the dust hood device extending from the opening of the dust hood device proximate to workpiece interface (i.e., where work-performing means W projects from dust hood device; fig. 4).
Additionally, Inoue states in para. 0044, “the tubular member 66 joined to the blade cover 55 is not limited to any angle with respect to the blade cover 55. However, the tubular member 66 should preferably be inclined to the holding surface 24 of the chuck table 21 so as to extend along the direction in which the cut dusts 90 are lifted up from the workpiece W.” Inoue suggests tubular member (66) can be arranged at any reasonable angle with respect to the dust hood device (55) as long as it is positioned to help lift and guide dust and debris (90) away from workpiece (W).
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Fleming and Inoue such that the guide element and the profile of the outer wall of the dust hood device so as to be a curved design extending above the lower side in order to provide a smooth guidance of flow between the first and second air channels in a dust hood device with a compact arrangement.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson (US Patent 9,662,800), Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244) and Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279430) in further view of Morgan (US Patent 2,819,571). Regarding Claim 21, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes a shaft (Carlsson, para. 0052 or hinge 40). The modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the shaft connects the two halves (i.e., because the two halves themselves connect to one another). However, Morgan teaches it is known in the art of dust hood devices to be formed by end plates (8) with ducting formed by bent plates (11, 12, 13) fixed together by pins (7, 14). The teaching of Morgan show it is known in the art of dust hood devices to be of modular construction consisting of two halves, or multiple portions, joined together to form the functional device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Morgan such that a shaft connects the two halves in order to simplify the construction and manufacture of the dust hood device since each half thereof can be molded and formed individually without worrying about molding design constraints associated with forming a one piece dust hood device with interior guide elements formed therein. Regarding Claim 22, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to specifically disclose two wheels supported on the shaft. However, Carlsson teaches another embodiment is a dost hood device (fig. 13) that includes two wheel (66). Moreover, Morgan teaches it is known in the art of dust hood devices to include a shaft (7) that is designed as a shaft connecting the two halves (col. 3, lines 29-31) is also has two wheels supported on the shaft (a plurality of annular steel discs 6 form roller 3). In col. 2, lines 40-41, Morgan states, “the roller can roll easily over the surface [of the workpiece] without causing much drag.” Additionally, in col. 3, lines 40-44, Morgan states, “[when] the operator uses the edge of the grinding wheel 2, the discs have sufficient play to be able to align themselves with a flat surface of the work if the grinding wheel is tilted through an angle of up to about 20º.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Morgan such that a shaft is provided on the dust hood device for supporting wheels in order to guide the dust hood device across the workpiece because the wheels can help to support and guide the power tool to which dust hood device is attached.
Claims 37 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson (US Patent 9,662,800), Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244) and Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279430) in further view of Dofher (US patent 8,061,344). Regarding claim 37, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to disclose wherein the extraction nozzle opens in a direction facing the rear side. However, Dofher teaches it is known in the art of dust hood collection devices to include an extraction tube (90) that extends upward and back toward a rear side of the dust hood collection device (10), as shown in fig. 1. The extraction tube (90) bends back toward vacuum source (8). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Dofher such that the extraction nozzle opens in any reasonable direction, including in a direction facing the rear side, in order to provide an efficient and smooth path for the dust to pass through and exit from the dust hood. Regarding claim 38, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above includes wherein the guide element extends toward the extraction nozzle and points away from the lower side toward the rear side (as shown by Inoue).
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson (US Patent 9,662,800), Inoue (US Publication 2017/0341254), Koegel (US Publication 2016/0332244) and Baratta (US Publication 2005/0279430) in further view of Vikholm et al (US Patent 9,630,343), herein referred to as Vikholm. Regarding claim 39, the modified dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above fails to disclose the dust hood device is of a modular construction including two side-by-side halves fastenable to each other by a screw and a star knob.
However, Vikholm teaches it is known in the art of dust guards for power tools with work-performing means to be of a modular construction including two side-by-side halves fastenable to each other by a screw and a star knob (fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the dust hood device of Carlsson substantially disclosed above such that the dust hood device is a modular construction including two side-by-side halves fastenable to each other by a screw and a star knob in order to allow for easy assembly and adjustment thereof.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 26, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 3, lines 6-13 of the Remarks, Applicant argues, “Applicant thanks the Examiner for the detailed explanation of the first opening and the clarification on the interruption of the first opening "during the connection member." However, as noted by the Examiner at page 6 of the Office action and citing Carlsson, it is exactly this configuration that Carlsson states creates "an efficient suction" and is a "lot more efficient when starting the cut and during shallow depth of the cut." There is simply no indication in Barrata or Koegel or Inoue that adding a guide element to separate flows or add a second opening would in any way improve this efficient flow. In fact it may just as well make starting the cut more difficult and eliminate advantages of Carlsson's design.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The configuration Applicant refers to is more efficient than the dust hood device described by Carlsson in the background section of their disclosure, i.e., the dust hood device of Johansson (US Publication 2008/0163492). Carlsson states in para. 0008, lines 13-23, “[t]his communication has no obstruction in total contrast to the block of US 2008/0163492, that had to suck only through the kerf[.] Therefore there is now an efficient suction from the longitudinal passage rearwards inside the cover device to a discharge member. As said this is a lot more efficient when starting the cut and during shallow depth of the cut. However it also adds to the efficiency for deep cuts as the sides of the saw blade, and especially the diamond segments and slots between them, will bring dust and slurry up into the longitudinal passage that will best be sucked away rearwards inside the cover device.” Carlsson removes the blocks present in the US 2008/0163492 reference. The teaching of Barrata, Koegel and Inoue suggests additional openings are known in the art, as are respective guiding elements to separate the openings and their respective air flows.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stasiewicz et al (US Publication 2011/0023674) discloses a dust collection system for a table saw including fins (100, 102) positioned within a dust shroud (right and left halves 34, 36) configured to help direct the flow of dust therein. Meister (US Patent 5,477,844) discloses a slurry recovery system for a wet cutting saw.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL ALLEN DAVIES whose telephone number is (571)270-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9am-5pm EST.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/SAMUEL A DAVIES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724 May 29, 2026
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights