DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on December 11, 2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 3, 10, and 13-15 have been amended, no claims have been cancelled, and claims 16-17 have been added. Thus, claims 1 and 3-17 are presently pending in the application.
Claim Interpretation
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
4. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
5. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“light emitting device” in claims 1, 13, 14, 15 which is interpreted as a device with a plurality of light emitting elements such as LEDs or the like according to paragraph [0021] of the specification.
“physiological information processing apparatus” in claims 1, 13, 14, 15 which is interpreted as a processing apparatus according to paragraph [0011] of the specification and fig. 1, 1 of the disclosure which includes connections with the respiratory sensor and light emitting device, a controller with a processor and memory, a network interface, a display unit, an input operation unit, and a storage device.
“elastic body” in claim 9 which is interpreted as a spring or the like according to paragraph [0062] of the specification.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
7. 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.
8. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8, 11, 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Khoury et al. (US 20180160970) in view of Duval-Arnould et al. (US 2015/0096559) hereinafter Duval.
Regarding claim 1, Khoury discloses a physiological information processing system (fig. 1, ventilation system 1) comprising:
a respiration sensor (fig. 1, thermal mass sensor 20) that is configured to detect a respiratory condition of a subject to whom a ventilation device is attached ([0070] states 20 is able to measure air flow rates on insufflation and expiration);
a light emitting device (fig. 1, electronic unit 21) that is configured to emit light away from the light emitting device ([0073] states display device 27 on electronic unit 21 is able to display warnings and fig. 3, shows color zones 28a-c that emit light which is inherently away from the light emitting device to be visible); and
a physiological information processing apparatus ([0024]-[0026] the data-processing center of the electronic unit 21 can intake user input, see fig. 4, steps 1-4 which requires an input operation unit, can function wirelessly according to [0023], can perform calculations on parameter inputs, see fig. 4, steps 5-10 which requires memory and storage, and communicate with display 27 as shown by fig. 5, steps 72 and 78) that is communicably connected to the respiration sensor and the light emitting device ([0031] states that sensor data is sent to the data-processing center, [0029] states that the data-processing center manages alarms which are displayed on display device 27 which is part of electronic unit 21, see fig. 1),
wherein the physiological information processing apparatus is configured to:
acquire a parameter relevant to respiration of the subject (fig. 7, step 92 calculates the tidal volume of the patient);
determine whether or not the parameter is included in a threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 compare the parameter to a threshold); and
transmit a lighting signal to the light emitting device that changes a visual aspect of the light emitting device in response to determining whether or not the parameter is included in the threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 either turn the corresponding alarm message on or off which inherently requires a signal to be sent to the display 27 of electronic unit 21),
wherein the light emitting device is removably attached to a columnar body of the respiration sensor (fig. 1, shows display 27 as part of electronic unit 21 being connected to respiratory sensor 20 via disconnectable connection means 22, and fig. 2, shows that respiration sensor 20 has a columnar body), and
wherein the light emitting device emits light in the visual aspect based on the lighting signal transmitted from the physiological information processing apparatus ([0029] states the data-processing center manages alarms that includes the alarms sent to the display device 27 according to the process depicted in fig. 7).
Khoury further describes the light emitting device as being able to be separate and remote ([0030]), but does not provide detail regarding the physiological information processing apparatus being remote from light emitting device (see [0030]), or provide detail on how this is accomplished.
However, Duval teaches of a ventilation feedback sensor where the sensing module (fig. 6, 130) is remote from a computing device (fig. 6, 170) and communicating via a communications interface that can be wireless ([0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the processing apparatus of Khoury with the remote computing device and communications interface as taught by Duval as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of allowing calculations to be sent to the light emitting device.
Regarding claim 3, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 2 and further reads on the light emitting device (fig. 1, electronic unit 21) comprises:
A light emitting element (fig. 1, display device 27) that is configured to emit light ([0073] states 27 can display various warnings and messages, therefore, emitting light is inherent to allow these messages to be visible):
A housing portion (fig. 1, the outer shell of electronic unit 21 is inherent as the electronic components are not exposed as seen also in fig. 2) that houses the light emitting element (display device 27) and that allows at least a portion of the light emitted from the light emitting element to pass through the housing portion ([0073] states that display device 27 displays various warnings and messages); and
An attachment portion (fig. 1, disconnectable connection means 22) that is connected to the housing portion (fig. 1, outer shell of electronic unit 21) and is attached to the columnar body of the respiration sensor (fig. 1, shows 22 attached to flow sensor 20 which has a columnar body as shown in fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on the attachment portion and the housing portion forming one piece construction (fig. 1, disconnectable connection means 22 is shown to be attached to electronic unit 21. [0070] states that 22 allows the connection between sensor 20 and unit 21).
Regarding claim 8, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on the housing portion (fig. 1, outer shell of electronic unit 21) comprising a first face (fig. 1, inner face of the inherent screen of display unit 27) and a second face opposed to the first face via the light emitting element (fig. 1, the outer face of the inherent screen of display unit 27 which opposes the first face by not being on the same side where the light emitting element is located) where the light emitted from the light emitting element passes through the first face and second face (fig. 3, the light coming from the display to show messages according to [0073], inherently must pass through the first and second faces of the display unit 27 to allow the messages to be visible).
Regarding claim 11, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on the parameter relevant to the respiration of the subject comprises at least one of: a parameter relevant to a ventilation volume of the subject; a parameter relevant to airway pressure of the subject; a parameter relevant to a respiration rate of the subject (fig. 4, step 10 measures the cycle time and ventilatory frequency, and fig. 7, step 92 calculates the tidal volume).
Regarding claim 13, Khoury discloses a light emitting device (fig. 1, electronic unit 21) that is removably attached to a columnar body of a ventilation device or of a respiration sensor (fig. 1, shows display 27 as part of electronic unit 21 being connected to respiratory sensor 20 via disconnectable connection means 22, and fig. 2, shows that respiration sensor 20 has a columnar body), the light emitting device comprising:
A light emitting element (fig. 1, display device 27) that is configured to emit light ([0073] states 27 can display various warnings and messages, therefore, emitting light is inherent to allow these messages to be visible);
A housing portion (fig. 1, the outer shell of electronic unit 21 is inherent as the electronic components are not exposed as seen also in fig. 2) that houses the light emitting element (display device 27) and that allows at least a portion of the light emitted from the light emitting element to pass through the housing portion ([0073] states that display device 27 displays various warnings and messages); and
An attachment portion (fig. 1, disconnectable connection means 22) that is connected to the housing portion (fig. 1, outer shell of electronic unit 21) and is attached to the columnar body (fig. 1, shows 22 attached to flow sensor 20 which has a columnar body as shown in fig. 2),
Wherein the light emitting device is configured to provide information indicating abnormality of a respiratory condition of the subject (fig. 7, shows that various alarm messages can be sent out in steps 98, 910, 912, 914, and 916, to the display device according to [0073]), and
Wherein the light emitting device is configured to emit light in a visual aspect based on a lighting signal transmitted from a physiological information processing apparatus ([0029] states the data-processing center manages alarms that includes the alarms sent to the display device 27 according to the process depicted in fig. 7), the lighting signal indicating whether a respiratory parameter of the subject is in a threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 compare the parameter to a threshold).
Khoury further describes the light emitting device as being able to be separate and remote ([0030]), but does not provide detail regarding the physiological information processing apparatus being remote from light emitting device (see [0030]), but does not provide detail on how this is accomplished.
However, Duval teaches of a ventilation feedback sensor where the sensing module (fig. 6, 130) is remote from a computing device (fig. 6, 170) and communicating via a communications interface that can be wireless ([0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the processing apparatus of Khoury with the remote computing device and communications interface as taught by Duval as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of allowing calculations to be sent to the light emitting device.
Regarding claim 14, the modified system of Khoury presented in the rejection to claim 1 above reads on the limitations of a physiological information processing apparatus (Khoury fig. 1, ventilation system 1) that is remote from a light emitting device (Duval fig. 6, computing device 170 is remote from sensing module 130 with LEDs 525) and that is communicably connected to the light emitting device and a respiration sensor (Duval fig. 6, communications interface 520 allows wireless communication between computing device and sensing module 130),
Wherein the light emitting device (Khoury fig. 1, display device 27) is configured to emit light away from the light emitting device (Khoury [0073] states 27 can display various warnings and messages, therefore, emitting light away from the device is inherent to allow these messages to be visible), and the respiration sensor (fig. 1, thermal mass sensor 20) that is configured to detect a respiratory condition of a subject to whom a ventilation device is attached ([0070] states 20 is able to measure air flow rates on insufflation and expiration),
wherein the physiological information processing apparatus is configured to:
acquire a parameter relevant to respiration of the subject (fig. 7, step 92 calculates the tidal volume of the patient);
determine whether or not the parameter is included in a threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 compare the parameter to a threshold); and
transmit a lighting signal to the light emitting device that changes a visual aspect of the light emitting device in response to determining whether or not the parameter is included in the threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 either turn the corresponding alarm message on or off which inherently requires a signal to be sent to the display 27 of electronic unit 21),
wherein the light emitting device is removably attached to a columnar body of the respiration sensor (fig. 1, shows display 27 as part of electronic unit 21 being connected to respiratory sensor 20 via disconnectable connection means 22, and fig. 2, shows that respiration sensor 20 has a columnar body), and
wherein the light emitting device emits light in the visual aspect based on the lighting signal transmitted from the physiological information processing apparatus ([0029] states the data-processing center manages alarms that includes the alarms sent to the display device 27 according to the process depicted in fig. 7).
Regarding claim 15, the modified system of Khoury as presented in the rejection of claim 1 reads on the limitations of a physiological information processing system (Khoury fig. 1, ventilation system 1) comprising:
a light emitting device (Khoury fig. 1, display device 27) is configured to emit light away from the light emitting device (Khoury [0073] states 27 can display various warnings and messages, therefore, emitting light away from the device is inherent to allow these messages to be visible); and
a physiological information processing apparatus (Khoury fig. 1, ventilation system 1) that is remote from a light emitting device (Duval fig. 6, computing device 170 is remote from sensing module 130 with LEDs 525) and that is communicably connected to the light emitting device and a respiration sensor (Duval fig. 6, communications interface 520 allows wireless communication between computing device and sensing module 130),
wherein the physiological information processing apparatus is configured to:
acquire a parameter relevant to respiration of the subject (fig. 7, step 92 calculates the tidal volume of the patient);
determine whether or not the parameter is included in a threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 compare the parameter to a threshold); and
transmit a lighting signal to the light emitting device that changes a visual aspect of the light emitting device in response to determining whether or not the parameter is included in the threshold range (fig. 7, step 914 and 915 either turn the corresponding alarm message on or off which inherently requires a signal to be sent to the display 27 of electronic unit 21),
wherein the light emitting device is removably attached to a columnar body of the respiration sensor (fig. 1, shows display 27 as part of electronic unit 21 being connected to respiratory sensor 20 via disconnectable connection means 22, and fig. 2, shows that respiration sensor 20 has a columnar body), and
wherein the light emitting device emits light in the visual aspect based on the lighting signal transmitted from the physiological information processing apparatus ([0029] states the data-processing center manages alarms that includes the alarms sent to the display device 27 according to the process depicted in fig. 7).
Regarding claim 16, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 1, and Khoury further reads on turning alarm messages on or off depending on depending on being above or below a threshold (fig. 7, max thresholds for each parameter). Khoury does not expressly disclose changing a speed of the blinking.
However, Duval teaches of indicators that can be LEDs ([0033]) that can be used to advise the user on the correct ventilation rate by flashing the LED quickly to indicated the ventilation rate is too fast, solidly lit to indicate the rate is right, or flashing slowly to indicate the ventilation rate is slow ([0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the physiological information processing apparatus of Khoury with the program as taught by Duval for the purpose of providing a visual cue to the user to ensure the patient is provided with an accurate ventilation rate.
Regarding claim 17, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 16 and further reads on the speed of the blinking is changed between predetermined rates (Duval [0036] states that the LED can blink at a slow rate for indicating the ventilation speed is slow, solid for indicating the ventilation speed is correct, and a fast rate for indicating the ventilation speed is too fast).
9. Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khoury in view of Duval and Stenzler et al (US 2019/0240428).
Regarding claim 5, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on the light emitting element (fig. 1, display device 27) as having distinct regions of color (fig. 3, color zones 28a-c). Khoury is silent on what colors are in each color zone.
However, Stenzler discloses a nebulizer device with a red-green-blue LED for status indication of the device ([0027]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the color zones of the display device of Khoury with the status indicating colors of red, green, and blue as taught by Stenzler for the purpose of allowing the user to easily glance at the display and understand the current volume tidal volume of the patient due to the contrast between the colors.
Regarding claim 12, The modified system of Khoury as presented in the rejection of claim 5 above reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on that when the respiration parameter is outside a threshold range a first color is emitted (fig. 3, color zone 28a lights up red to indicate insufficient tidal volume according to [0077] of Khoury), and when the respiration parameter is inside a threshold range a second color is emitted (fig. 3, color zone 28b light up green to indicate sufficient tidal volume according to [0077] of Khoury).
10. Claims 6-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khoury in view of Duval and Prager (US 2017/0304552).
Regarding claim 6, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 3 and states that the communication between the sensor (fig. 1, 20) and the light emitting device (fig. 1, electronic unit 21) can be wireless ([0023]). Khoury is silent on the nature of the attachment portion having a first and second piece which pinch the columnar body of the respiration sensor when attached and at least one of the first piece and the second piece is elastically deformed when attached to the columnar body of the respiration sensor.
However, Prager teaches of a sensor device which attaches to a columnar body with a mating unit (fig. 2a, 20-1 and 20-2) so that the device sits tightly against the columnar body ([0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the attachment portion (disconnectable connection portion 22) of Khoury with the mating unit as taught by Prager as it is a simple substitution of known elements to yield the predictable results of allowing the light emitting device (electronic unit 21) to connect to the columnar body (fig. 2, shows a columnar body of respiration sensor 20).
The modified device of Khoury reads on the claimed limitations because the mating unit as taught by Prager has a first piece (fig. 2A, 20-1), a second piece opposed to the first piece (fig. 2A, 20-2), the first and second pieces are able to pinch a columnar body to attach ([0034] of Prager states the mating unit embraces the columnar housing of the injection device), and at least one of the first and second pieces must elastically deform when they are attached to the columnar body as it is inherent in the pushing of a clip onto a body larger than the clip’s opening (see annotated fig. 2a below which shows that the opening of the clip “distance 1” is smaller than the diameter of the housed body “distance 2”).
PNG
media_image1.png
464
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the modified system of Khoury presented in the rejection of claim 6 reads on the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses a first front end portion that is connected to the first piece (see annotated fig. 2a above where the first front end portion is the shaded portion of first piece 20-1), a second front end portion connected to the second piece opposing the first piece (see annotated fig. 2a above where the first front end portion pictured is reflected onto the other side as is inherent in accommodating a columnar body), and where the distance between the first and second front end portions increase away from the housing portion (see annotated fig. 2a above where the interval is increasing as shown by “distance 3” being smaller than “distance 2”).
Regarding claim 10, the modified system of Khoury presented in the rejection of claim 6 above reads on the limitation of claim 2 and further discloses the ability of the light emitting device (fig. 1 of Khoury, electronic unit 21) to be rotatably attached around an axis of the columnar body of the respiration sensor (fig. 2a of Prager, the mating unit of 20 allows attachment to a column and can inherently be rotated as it is able to attach to any portion of a circular column).
11. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khoury in view of Duval and Shetler et al. (US 2003/0106917).
Regarding claim 9, the modified system of Khoury reads on the limitations of claim 3. Khoury is silent on the attachment portion comprising a first piece, and second piece opposed to the first piece, and an elastic body configured to apply a restoring force to the first piece and the second piece such that the first piece and the second piece pinch the columnar body of the respiration sensor.
However, Shetler teaches of a holster for an electronic device with an elastic body (fig. 1, lead spring 18) which pushes against both a first piece (fig. 1, back wall of harness 10) and second piece (fig. 1, clip member 16) which allows the securing of harness 10 and its contents to a user’s belt ([0003]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the disconnectable connection means of Khoury with the holster as taught by Shetler for the purpose of allowing the electronic unit to be placed in the holster and clipped to a belt for monitoring while away from the ventilation device.
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-17 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.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS Z CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. 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.
/THOMAS Z CHANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785