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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/23/2026 (“Response”) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the rejection of claim 1 over Zhang and Liu should be withdrawn because (1) Liu fails to teach “the first portion [of the resilient element] is in contact with the vaporizer” as claimed (Response p. 7-8 and p. 10), (2) there is no motivation to combine because Zhang already discloses a spring electrode 14 which functions similarly to Liu’s compression spring 61 (Response p. 8-10).
Regarding (1), the Examiner respectfully disagrees because the claim element is taught by modified Zhang, not by Liu individually. 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). Applicant is correct that Liu’s first compression spring 61 is not in contact with a “vaporizer” as claimed. However, Zhang’s electrodes 10 are in contact with the atomizing element 7.2 (“vaporizer”) as shown in Fig. 3, and when Zhang’s electrodes 10 are replaced with Liu’s electrode assembly 40 including the electrode piece 41 and compression spring 61, the resulting structure in modified Zhang would have the compression spring 61 in contact with the atomizing element 7.2, which reads on the claim language. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Liu’s principle of providing a reliable electrical connection with the compression spring 61 could similarly be applied to other electrical connections in Zhang.
Regarding (2), the Examiner respectfully disagrees because Liu provides motivation to replace either or both of Zhang’s heating element electrodes 10 and spring electrodes 14 with Liu’s electrode assembly 40. The replacement of Zhang’s heating element electrodes 10 is specifically discussed in the rejections below because that modification is most relevant to the claim language, but the Examiner acknowledges that other modifications to Zhang would also be obvious in view of Liu, such as replacing the spring electrodes 14 as discussed by the Applicant at p. 8-10. 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, Liu teaches that its elastic electrical connection is advantageous because “the processing technology is simple, and with high reliability” [0019]. Substituting Liu’s electrode assembly 40 for either or both of Zhang’s heating element electrodes 10 and spring electrodes 14 would result in a resilient electrical connection in Zhang, and replacing the heating element electrodes 10 in particular would further simplify the processing technology for manufacturing Zhang’s device, as taught by Liu. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to replace Zhang’s heating element electrodes 10 with Liu’s electrode assembly 40.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 4-7, 10-21, 23, 27-28, 33, and 35-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 109805460 A, of record, previously cited with English translation) in view of Liu (US 2015/0150307 A1, of record, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang is directed to an atomizing device and a main power supply device for an electronic cigarette (Title), the electronic cigarette reading on an “aerosol provision system” as claimed. The atomizing device includes a heating element 7 with an atomizing element 7.2 (“vaporizer”) which heats and atomizes an atomizing liquid ([0052], Fig. 2). The atomizing device includes heating element electrodes 10 (“electrode”) for connecting the power supply device to the heating element 7 ([0054, 0056], Fig. 2). As shown in Figs. 2-3 and 5, the electrodes 10 have two ends, with one end contacting the atomizing element 7.2 (which reads on “wherein the electrode extends between a first end of the electrode and a second end of the electrode, wherein the first end of the electrode is located more proximal to the vaporizer than the second end of the electrode is located to the vaporizer”). The other end of the electrodes 10 contacts spring electrodes 14 of the power supply device ([0059], Fig. 2).
Zhang fails to disclose “a resilient element, electrically connected to the vaporizer and the electrode, for transferring the electrical power between the electrode and the vaporizer, wherein the resilient element extends around the electrode, wherein the resilient element comprises a first portion proximal the vaporizer and a second portion proximal the electrode” and “wherein the first end of the electrode is located between the first portion and the second portion of the resilient element, and wherein the resilient element at least partly supports the vaporizer, such that the resilient element is configured to be held in compression between the vaporizer and the electrode, wherein the first portion is in contact with the vaporizer”.
PNG
media_image1.png
572
408
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Liu is directed to an electronic cigarette (Title). The electronic cigarette includes a first electrode assembly 40 electrically connecting an atomization device 20 and a battery 30 ([0041], Fig. 2). The first electrode assembly 40 includes a first electrode piece 41 (“electrode”) and a first compression spring 61 (“resilient element”) facing an electrode 31 of the battery 30 ([0042-43], Figs. 2 and 6). The first compression spring 61 is fixed to electrically connect the first electrode piece 41 to the battery 30 [0043] (which reads on “a resilient element, electrically connected to the vaporizer and the electrode, for transferring the electrical power between the electrode and the vaporizer”). As shown in Figs. 2 and 5-6, the compression spring 61 surrounds a first convex column 411 of the electrode piece 41 and extends beyond it [0043] (which reads on “wherein the resilient element extends around the electrode”). The other end of the first electrode assembly 40 may be coupled to the atomizer 20 or to a second electrode assembly 70 ([0041, 0049, 0053], Figs. 2-6). Liu’s first electrode assembly 40 advantageously achieves electrical connection by elastic abutting which is simple and highly reliable [0019].
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Liu’s first electrode assembly 40 and compression spring 61 could be arranged to replace Zhang’s electrode 10 to make a simple and reliable electrical connection. For instance, the components could be arranged such that the compression spring 61 contacts Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2 and the other end of the electrode assembly 40 contacts Zhang’s spring electrodes 14 (which reads on “wherein the resilient element comprises a first portion proximal the vaporizer and a second portion proximal the electrode” and “wherein the first end of the electrode is located between the first portion and the second portion of the resilient element, and wherein the resilient element at least partly supports the vaporizer, such that the resilient element is configured to be held in compression between the vaporizer and the electrode, wherein the first portion is in contact with the vaporizer”).
PNG
media_image2.png
914
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
946
596
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhang by replacing the heating element electrodes 10 with Liu’s first electrode assembly 40 such that the compression spring 61 contacts Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2 and the other end of the electrode assembly 40 contacts Zhang’s spring electrodes 14, because both Zhang and Liu are directed to electronic cigarettes, Liu teaches that this provides a simple and reliable elastic electrical connection, and this would involve a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 4, one end of Liu’s compression spring 61 contacts the electrode piece 41 and column 411, as shown in Figs. 2-6, which reads on “wherein the second portion is in contact with the electrode”.
Regarding claim 5, one end of Liu’s compression spring 61 contacts a flat surface (“shoulder portion”) of the electrode piece 41, as shown in Figs. 2-7.
Regarding claim 6, Liu’s electrode piece 41 has a flat surface (“shoulder portion”) for receiving the compression spring 61, as shown in Figs. 2-7, particularly Fig. 7.
Regarding claim 7, the flat surface of Liu’s electrode piece 41 “extends around an entirety” of its circumference, as shown particularly in Fig. 7.
Regarding claim 10, Liu’s electrode piece 41 has a flat surface (“shoulder portion”) for receiving the compression spring 61, and the flat surface is located between the ends of the electrode piece 41, as shown in Figs. 2-7, particularly Fig. 7.
Regarding claim 11, as shown in Fig. 6, Liu’s convex column 411 has a smaller cross sectional area than the remainder of the electrode piece 41, which in modified Zhang reads on “wherein a cross sectional area of the electrode decreases in a direction from the second end of the electrode to the first end of the electrode”. Additionally, modifying the cross sectional area of Liu’s electrode piece 41 would be a mere change in shape which does not patentably distinguish the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B); see also In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang and Liu fail to disclose Liu’s electrode piece 41 having a “chamfered or filleted edge extending around the first end” as claimed. However, modifying the electrode piece 41 to have such a chamfered or filleted edge would be a mere change in shape which does not patentably distinguish the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B); see also In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 13, Liu’s compression spring 61 is held in compression against the battery 30 ([0043], Figs. 2 and 5-6), and thus in modified Zhang as set forth above, the compression spring 61 would similarly provide a “biasing force or a compression force” on Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2.
Regarding claim 14, as shown in Liu’s Figs. 2 and 5-6, the compression spring 61 compresses toward the electrode piece 41, and thus provides a biasing force “in a direction away from the electrode” as claimed.
Regarding claim 15, Liu’s compression spring 61 is held in compression against the battery 30 ([0043], Figs. 2 and 5-6), and thus in modified Zhang as set forth above, the compression spring 61 would similarly be “biased into engagement” with Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2.
Regarding claim 16, as shown in Liu’s Figs. 2 and 4-6, the compression spring 61 is a “helical spring”.
Regarding claim 17, Zhang and Liu fail to disclose Liu’s compression spring 61 having a “flat surface” at the end proximal the battery 30. However, providing such a flat surface would be merely changing the shape of the compression spring 61 which does not patentably distinguish the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B); see also In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 18, in modified Zhang, as set forth above in the discussions of claims 1 and 17, the compression spring 61 with a flat surface at the end thereof is arranged contacting the atomizing element 7.2, which reads on “wherein the flat surface is in contact with the vaporizer”.
Regarding claim 19, as shown in Liu’s Figs. 2 and 4-6, the compression spring 61 “extends concentrically around” the electrode piece 41.
Regarding claim 20, Liu’s compression spring 61 is held in compression against the battery 30 ([0043], Figs. 2 and 5-6), and thus in modified Zhang as set forth above, the compression spring 61 would similarly be “held in compression” between Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2 and spring electrodes 14.
Regarding claim 21, Liu’s compression spring 61 electrically connects the electrode piece 41 to the battery 30 [0043], and thus the compression spring 61 “comprises an electrically conductive material for transferring the electrical power received by the electrode to the vaporizer” as claimed.
Regarding claim 23, Liu is silent on the materials of the compression spring 61. One of ordinary skill in the art would expect the compression spring 61 to be “made of the electrically conductive material” because springs are well-known in the art to be made of conductive metals.
Regarding claim 27, Zhang’s heating element 7 further includes a porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 (“porous member”) which guides the atomizing liquid to the atomizing element 7.2 [0052].
Regarding claim 28, Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2 is “located on a surface” of the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 ([0052], Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 33, Liu’s compression spring 61 is held in compression against the battery 30 ([0043], Figs. 2 and 5-6), and thus in modified Zhang as set forth above, the compression spring 61 would similarly “at least partly support” Zhang’s porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 and would be “held in compression” between the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 and the spring electrodes 14.
Regarding claim 35, Zhang’s atomizing element 7.2 includes a “heating element” ([0052], Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 36, Zhang discloses a liquid storage chamber 3 (“reservoir”) which delivers atomizing liquid to the heating element 7 [0056].
Regarding claim 37, Zhang’s electronic cigarette includes the atomizing device A (“cartridge”) which includes the heating element 7 and electrodes 10 ([0055, 0064], Figs. 1-2). Thus, in modified Zhang, the atomizing device A would further include Liu’s electrode piece 41 and compression spring 61, which reads on “wherein the electrode, the vaporizer, and the resilient element are located in the cartridge”. Zhang’s electronic cigarette further includes the power supply device B (“control unit”) which includes a fixing slot 11 (“interface”) connected to the bottom of the atomizing device A to fix the atomizing device A and power supply device B together ([0057, 0064], Figs. 1-2), which reads on “wherein the control unit comprises a cartridge receiving section that includes an interface arranged to cooperatively engage with the cartridge so as to releasably couple the cartridge to the control unit”. The power supply device B includes a battery assembly 16 (“power supply”) which delivers power to the heating element 7 [0057, 0064].
Claims 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 109805460 A, of record, previously cited with English translation) in view of Liu (US 2015/0150307 A1, of record, previously cited) as applied to claim 21, further in view of Sinclair (US 6,341,962 B1, of record, previously cited).
Modified Zhang discloses the conductive compression spring 61, as set forth above in the discussion of claim 21. However, Zhang and Liu fail to disclose that the conductive material is “deposited” onto the compression spring 61 as recited in claim 22. Zhang and Liu further fail to disclose the conductive material comprising “gold” as recited in claim 24.
Sinclair is directed to a connector assembly for solderlessly connecting an integrated circuit package to a printed circuit board (Abstract), which is reasonably pertinent to the problem solved by the inventors of the instant application (such problem being how to electrically connect two parts of an electrical assembly; see Applicant’s Substitute Specification – Clean Copy at p. 2 l. 8-10). Sinclair discloses resilient spring-like electrical contacts which may be coated with gold for high flexibility, resiliency and electrical conductivity (the coating reading on “deposited” per claim 22 and “gold” per claim 24) (p. 1 l. 62-p. 2 l. 18). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that such gold plating would predictably provide favorable properties to Liu’s compression spring 61.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify Zhang by coating Liu’s compression spring 61 with gold, because both Zhang and Liu are directed to electronic cigarettes which are within the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, Sinclair is reasonably pertinent to the problem solved, Sinclair discloses that such gold coating provides high flexibility, resiliency and electrical conductivity, and this would involve the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 109805460 A, of record, previously cited with English translation) in view of Liu (US 2015/0150307 A1, of record, previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Thomas (US 4,112,952 A, of record, previously cited).
Modified Zhang discloses the compression spring 61, as set forth above in the discussion of claim 1. However, Zhang and Liu each fail to disclose that the compression spring 61 comprises “an alloy containing cobalt, chromium, and nickel” per claim 25 and “wherein the alloy is an alloy containing cobalt, chromium, nickel, molybdenum, and manganese” per claim 26.
Thomas is directed to an electrode for an artificial pacemaker (Title), which is reasonably pertinent to the problem solved by the inventors of the instant application (such problem being how to electrically connect two parts of an electrical assembly; see Applicant’s Substitute Specification – Clean Copy at p. 2 l. 8-10). The electrode includes a plurality of resilient conductive wires 10 made of a corrosion resistant alloy such as ELGILOY, which include cobalt, chromium, nickel, molybdenum, and manganese (which reads on claims 25-26) (col. 1 l. 65-66, col. 2 l. 44-53). The wires 10 are coiled to achieve a spring effect (col. 2 l. 54-56). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that ELGILOY could predictably be used to make Liu’s compression spring 61, in order to provide corrosion resistance.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify Zhang by forming Liu’s compression spring 61 from ELGILOY, because both Zhang and Liu are directed to electronic cigarettes which are within the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, Thomas is reasonably pertinent to the problem solved, Thomas discloses that ELGILOY provides corrosion resistance, and this would involve the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 29-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 109805460 A, of record, previously cited with English translation) in view of Liu (US 2015/0150307 A1, of record, previously cited) as applied to claim 27, further in view of Li (CN 109007980 A, of record, previously cited with English translation).
Regarding claims 29-30, modified Zhang discloses the heating element 7 with the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 which guides the atomizing liquid to the atomizing element 7.2, as set forth above in the discussion of claim 27. However, Zhang and Liu fail to disclose the compression spring 61 being “embedded or recessed inside” the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 per claim 29, and fail to disclose the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 having a “cavity for accommodating” the compression spring 61 per claim 30.
Li is directed to atomizing devices and electronic cigarettes (Title). Li discloses a heating component 12 which includes a porous ceramic liquid conductor 121 having a bottom surface 121b, with an electrode 123 inserted into the bottom surface 121b to connect the heating component 12 to a power supply ([0035], Figs. 2-4). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Zhang’s heating element 7 is structurally similar to Li’s heating component 12 (compare Zhang’s Figs. 2-6 with Li’s Figs. 2-4), and thus Zhang could similarly be modified such that the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 has an opening on the bottom surface for receiving the electrode piece 41 and compression spring 61 (which reads on “wherein the first portion of the resilient element is embedded or recessed inside the porous member” per claim 29 and “wherein the porous member comprises a cavity for accommodating the first portion of the resilient element” per claim 30). One of ordinary skill in the art would further recognize that such a modification could increase the stability and reliability of the physical and electrical connection between the compression spring 61 and the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1.
PNG
media_image4.png
700
476
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
522
660
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify Zhang by forming an opening in the bottom surface of the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 to accommodate the compression spring 61, because Zhang, Liu, and Li are all directed to electronic cigarettes, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that such a modification increases the stability and reliability of the connection between the porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 and the compression spring 61, and this modification would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 31, Li further discloses a heating element 122 disposed on the bottom surface 121b of the porous ceramic liquid guide 121 [0034]. As shown in Figs. 2-3, the bottom surface 121b is a “flat surface” and includes the cavity for accommodating the electrodes 123, which reads on the claim language. In modified Zhang as set forth above in the discussion of claims 29-30, Zhang’s porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 with atomizing element 7.2 on the bottom thereof would similarly read on the claim language.
Regarding claim 32, Zhang, Liu, and Li fail to disclose Liu’s compression spring 61 having a “flat surface” at the end contacting Zhang’s heating element 7. However, providing such a flat surface would be merely changing the shape of the compression spring 61 which does not patentably distinguish the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B); see also In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Such a flat surface of the compression spring 61 would be parallel to the bottom surface of Zhang’s porous ceramic liquid guide 7.1 in modified Zhang as set forth above in the discussion of claim 31, which reads on “wherein the flat surface of the helical spring is parallel to the flat surface of the cavity”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL PATRICK MULLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7 ET.
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, Michael H. Wilson can be reached at (571) 270-3882. 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.
/MICHAEL PATRICK MULLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/SEDEF E PAQUETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights