DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to Applicant’s reply filed 2/24/2026.
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 .
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.
Claim Status
Claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-20 are pending.
Claims 3 and 15 are cancelled.
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1, 4-5, 9, and 16-17 are currently amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-17 (all pending, non-withdrawn claims) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 9, the limitations regarding the first/second thermoelectric materials “fluidly coupled to the one or more” return/supply lines (claim 1) or first/second chamber components (claim 9) are regarded as new matter.
Particularly, the disclosure does not appear to describe, show, or imply that there is direct fluidic contact between the cooling fluid and the actual thermoelectric materials (see Figs. 4A-C as cited by Applicant as support for the added limitations; additionally pars. [0075]-[0076] of the instant PG-Pub). Instead, the disclosure appears to only show and/or describe where the TEGs (as a unit) are in physical contact with supply/return lines to provide thermal transfer.
Regarding claims 2, 4-8, 10-14, and 16-17, the claims are rejected at least based upon their respective dependencies.
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 1-2, 4-14, and 16-17 (all pending, non-withdrawn claims) 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 9, the limitations regarding the first/second thermoelectric materials “fluidly coupled to the one or more” return/supply lines (claim 1) or first/second chamber components (claim 9) are regarded as indefinite in light of the disclosure as a whole. The disclosure appears to show and/or describe where the TEGs (as a unit) are in physical contact with supply/return lines to provide thermal transfer (see Figs. 4A-C as cited by Applicant as support for the added limitations).
In the interest of compact and expedited prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation as reading: “thermally coupled to the one or more return/supply lines”.
Regarding claims 2, 4-8, 10-14, and 16-17, the claims are rejected at least based upon their respective dependencies.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US Pub. 2017/0103907) in view of Nakagawa (US Pub. 2014/0206204) Wasiak (Alternative Energy Sources. Switzerland, MDPI AG, 2021, pg. 41), and Chang (US Patent 10,867,892), with Matsushita (US Pub. 2013/0068970) as an evidentiary reference.
Regarding claim 1, Chu teaches a processing system applicable for use in semiconductor manufacturing (Fig. 3, entirety), comprising: a chamber ([0030] and Fig. 3, chamber #200) comprising: one or more sidewalls at least partially defining an internal volume (see Fig. 3), one or more windows at least partially defining a processing volume of the internal volume ([0031] and Fig. 3, transmissive members #208/#210), one or more heat sources configured to generate heat ([0037] and Fig. 3, lamps #204), a liner disposed in the internal volume and lining at least part of one or more sidewalls ([0038] and Fig. 3, liner #263), and one or more cooling channels ([0037] and Fig. 3, cooling channels #149/#249); a fluid system in fluid communication with the one or more cooling channels ([0037]).
While Chu does not explicitly teach the fluid system comprising: one or more supply lines configured to supply a fluid to the one or more cooling channels at a first temperature, and one or more return lines configured to flow the fluid from the one or more cooling channels at a second temperature that is higher than the first temperature, and a fluid motor configured to move the fluid, the Examiner notes these features must inherently be present in the Chu apparatus for it to function.
In support of this assertion of inherency, the Examiner provides Matsushita ([0056] and Fig. 8).
Chu does not teach an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, nor wherein the energy harnessing device is thermally coupled (see the §112(b) rejection of the claim for interpretation) to the one or more supply lines and return lines.
However, Nakagawa teaches such a device (Nakagawa – [0028]-[0029] and Fig. 3A, Rankine cycle device #300A generates power from a heated fluid; [0031]: may include refrigerant for cooling a chamber; is thermally/physically coupled to refrigerant path #310 with supply/return loop).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the Nakagawa device in the Chu apparatus in order to reduce power consumption by efficiently generating power (Nakagawa – [0006], [0027]).
Modified Chu does not teach the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs).
However, Wasiak teaches wherein thermoelectric generators and Rankine cycle devices (of the type used by Nakagawa) are art-recognized equivalent devices for the same purpose (Wasiak – par. 3 of the attached reference).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to substitute a thermoelectric generator for the Rankine device of modified Chu since the art recognizes the two as equivalent devices for heat recovery/energy generators (see Wasiak, as above). See MPEP 2144.06(II).
Additionally, Wasiak teaches wherein thermoelectric generators are simple, robust, modular, maintenance free, and environmentally friendly (Wasiak, last par).
Modified Chu does not teach wherein each of the one or more TEGs comprises a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material, wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material are different materials.
However, Chang teaches wherein the one or more TEGs comprise a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material that is different than the first thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67), wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material each comprises one or more of: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), bismuth telluride (Bi2Te3), telluride (Te), lead telluride (PbTe), or silicon germanium (SiGe) (Chang – C6, L53-67: e.g. copper, bismuth telluride, lead telluride).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Regarding claim 2, Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Nakagawa teaches wherein the one or more energy harnessing devices are disposed within the fluid motor (Nakagawa – pump device and turbine #304 are both elements of the Rankine device #300A).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the Nakagawa device in the Chu apparatus in order to reduce power consumption by efficiently generating power (Nakagawa – [0006], [0027]).
Modified Chu does not teach the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs).
However, Wasiak teaches wherein thermoelectric generators and Rankine cycle devices (of the type used by Nakagawa) are art-recognized equivalent devices for the same purpose (Wasiak – par. 3 of the attached reference).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to substitute a thermoelectric generator for the Rankine device of modified Chu since the art recognizes the two as equivalent devices for heat recovery/energy generators (see Wasiak, as above). See MPEP 2144.06(II).
Additionally, Wasiak teaches wherein thermoelectric generators are simple, robust, modular, maintenance free, and environmentally friendly (Wasiak, last par).
Regarding claim 4, modified Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claims.
However, Chang teaches wherein the one or more TEGs comprise a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material that is different than the first thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67), wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material each comprises one or more of: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), bismuth telluride (Bi2Te3), telluride (Te), lead telluride (PbTe), or silicon germanium (SiGe) (Chang – C6, L53-67: e.g. copper, bismuth telluride, lead telluride).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Regarding claim 5, modified Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claims.
However, Chang teaches wherein a first array of the first thermoelectric material is disposed in an alternating arrangement with a second array of the second thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67 and Fig. 2, #105a,b,c,d).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials and structure of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Regarding claims 6-7, while Chu does not explicitly teach the added limitations of the claim, the Examiner notes these features must inherently be present in the Chu apparatus for it to function.
In support of this assertion of inherency, the Examiner provides Matsushita ([0056] and Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Nakagawa teaches wherein the one or more energy harnessing device are disposed between a supply section of the heat exchanger fluid and a return section of the heat exchanger fluid (Nakagawa – [0028]-[0029] and Fig. 3A, Rankine cycle device #300A generates power from a heated fluid; [0031]: may include refrigerant for cooling a chamber).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the Nakagawa device in the Chu apparatus in order to reduce power consumption by efficiently generating power (Nakagawa – [0006], [0027]).
Modified Chu does not teach the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs).
However, Wasiak teaches wherein thermoelectric generators and Rankine cycle devices (of the type used by Nakagawa) are art-recognized equivalent devices for the same purpose (Wasiak – par. 3 of the attached reference).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to substitute a thermoelectric generator for the Rankine device of modified Chu since the art recognizes the two as equivalent devices for heat recovery/energy generators (see Wasiak, as above). See MPEP 2144.06(II).
Claims 9-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US Pub. 2017/0103907) in view of Dhyllon (US Patent 10,342,110) and Chang (US Patent 10,867,892).
Regarding claim 9, Chu teaches a processing system applicable for use in semiconductor manufacturing (Fig. 3, entirety), comprising: a chamber ([0030] and Fig. 3, chamber #200) comprising: one or more sidewalls at least partially defining an internal volume (see Fig. 3), one or more windows at least partially defining a processing volume of the internal volume ([0031] and Fig. 3, transmissive members #208/#210), one or more heat sources configured to generate heat ([0037] and Fig. 3, lamps #204), a liner disposed in the internal volume and lining at least part of one or more sidewalls ([0038] and Fig. 3, liner #263), and one or more cooling channels ([0037] and Fig. 3, cooling channels #149/#249).
Chu does not teach an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs), nor wherein the energy harnessing device is thermally coupled (see the §112(b) rejection of the claim for interpretation) to a first and second chamber component.
However, Dhyllon teaches an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs) (Dhyllon – C2, L34-54; C5, L55-60; C6, L23-37), wherein the energy harnessing device is thermally coupled to a first and second chamber component (see Fig. 4, connected to a plurality of components).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to incorporate the plasma power generator of Dhyllon into the Chu apparatus in order to generate clean energy from excess heat generated by plasma (Dhyllon – C1, L12-C2, L2).
Modified Chu does not teach wherein each of the one or more TEGs comprises a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material, wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material are different materials.
However, Chang teaches wherein the one or more TEGs comprise a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material that is different than the first thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67), wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material each comprises one or more of: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), bismuth (Bi2Te3), telluride (Te), lead telluride (PbTe), or silicon germanium (SiGe) (Chang – C6, L53-67: e.g. copper, bismuth telluride, lead telluride).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Regarding claim 10, Chu teaches a liner ([0038] and Fig. 3, liner #263).
Chu does not teach wherein the one or more TEGs interface with one or more of the liner or the one or more sidewalls.
However, Dhyllon teaches an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs) (Dhyllon – C2, L34-54; C5, L55-60; C6, L23-37), wherein the one or more TEGs interface with one or more of the liner or the one or more sidewalls (Dhyllon – C5, L55-60).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to incorporate the plasma power generator of Dhyllon into the Chu apparatus in order to generate clean energy from excess heat generated by plasma (Dhyllon – C1, L12-C2, L2).
Regarding claim 11, Chu teaches a liner ([0038] and Fig. 3, liner #263).
Chu does not teach wherein the one or more TEGs are disposed between the liner and the one or more sidewalls.
However, Dhyllon teaches an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs) (Dhyllon – C2, L34-54; C5, L55-60; C6, L23-37), wherein the one or more TEGs are disposed between the liner and the one or more sidewalls (Dhyllon – C5, L55-66).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to incorporate the plasma power generator of Dhyllon into the Chu apparatus in order to generate clean energy from excess heat generated by plasma (Dhyllon – C1, L12-C2, L2).
Regarding claim 12, Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claim.
However, Dhyllon teaches wherein the one or more TEGs are disposed outwardly of the one or more sidewalls (Dhyllon – C5, L55-C6,L2: TEG is generally part of a wall, which implies that it also does not need to be inside the wall, but merely in contact- Dhyllon states that the only criteria is that the TEG is present to conduct heat away).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to incorporate the plasma power generator of Dhyllon into the Chu apparatus in order to generate clean energy from excess heat generated by plasma (Dhyllon – C1, L12-C2, L2).
Regarding claim 13, Chu teaches a liner ([0038] and Fig. 3, liner #263).
Chu does not teach wherein the one or more TEGs are disposed between the one or more sidewalls and a metal plate.
However, Dhyllon teaches an energy harnessing device configured to harness energy to produce electrical energy, the energy harnessing device comprising one or more thermoelectric generators (TEGs) (Dhyllon – C2, L34-54; C5, L55-60; C6, L23-37), wherein the one or more TEGs are disposed between the one or more sidewalls and a metal plate (Dhyllon – C5, L55-66).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to incorporate the plasma power generator of Dhyllon into the Chu apparatus in order to generate clean energy from excess heat generated by plasma (Dhyllon – C1, L12-C2, L2).
The Examiner notes that the “metal plate” is not positively recited as an element of the claimed processing system, thus carries an interpretation under intended use.
Regarding claim 16, modified Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claims.
However, Chang teaches wherein the one or more TEGs comprise a first thermoelectric material and a second thermoelectric material that is different than the first thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67), wherein the first thermoelectric material and the second thermoelectric material each comprises one or more of: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), bismuth (Bi2Te3), telluride (Te), lead telluride (PbTe), or silicon germanium (SiGe) (Chang – C6, L53-67: e.g. copper, bismuth telluride, lead telluride).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Regarding claim 17, modified Chu does not teach the added limitations of the claims.
However, Chang teaches wherein a first array of the first thermoelectric material is disposed in an alternating arrangement with a second array of the second thermoelectric material (Chang – C6, L53-67 and Fig. 2, #105a,b,c,d).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to utilize the materials and structure of Chang in the TEG of the modified Chu apparatus in order to provide for effective/efficient heat dissipation with a reduced form factor (Chang – C3, L4-13).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US Pub. 2017/0103907), Dhyllon (US Patent 10,342,110), and Chang (US Patent 10,867,892), as applied to claims 9-13 and 16-17 above, with Matsushita (US Pub. 2013/0068970) as an evidentiary reference.
The limitations of claims 9-13 and 16-17 are set forth above.
Regarding claim 14, Chu teaches one or more cooling channels ([0037] and Fig. 3, cooling channels #149/#249); a fluid system in fluid communication with the one or more cooling channels ([0037]).
While Chu does not explicitly teach the fluid system comprising: one or more supply lines configured to supply a fluid to the one or more cooling channels at a first temperature, and one or more return lines configured to flow the fluid from the one or more cooling channels at a second temperature that is higher than the first temperature, and a fluid motor configured to move the fluid, the Examiner notes these features must inherently be present in the Chu apparatus for it to function.
In support of this assertion of inherency, the Examiner provides Matsushita ([0056] and Fig. 8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended claims 4 and 16 to correct minor informalities, thus the objections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments concerning the §103 rejections have been carefully considered, but are not persuasive. As a whole, the arguments do not correctly address the particular combination of references by the Examiner.
As an initial matter, the Examiner notes claims 1 and 9 appear to have introduced new matter and indefinite claim language not previously presented, thus are defective before even considering their content relative to the prior art. The Examiner has attempted to provide a reasonable interpretation of the claims in the interest of compact and expedited prosecution. It is through that applied interpretation that the argued limitations should be viewed.
To add clarity to the Examiner’s previous position as argued by the Applicant, the Examiner notes the limitations added to claims 1 and 9 include additional limitations to those presented in previous claims 3 and 15. The Examiner’s previous acknowledgement of the deficiencies of modified Chu only applies to the material aspects of the first/second thermoelectric materials, not their arrangement relative to chamber components. The patentability of the claimed arrangement has been addressed herein in response to the aforementioned amendments.
Turning to Chang, the Applicant incorrectly looks to the reference for how the thermoelectric materials disposed therein are arranged relative to other components. This is contrary to how the Examiner utilizes Chang in the rejection. Chang is only relied upon to teach particular conventional thermoelectric materials, not their arrangement.
Claims 1 and 9 hinge on Nakagawa and Dhyllon, respectively, to teach the arrangement of energy harnessing devices relative to other chamber components. The Examiner respectfully submits that Nakagawa and Dhyllon appear to reasonably teach the claimed arrangement of the added limitations.
Applicant has not argued Nakagawa or Dhyllon in any capacity, thus the examiner maintains the rejections on substantially the same grounds as previous claims 3 and 15 (with additional considerations for the newly added limitations).
Applicant’s allegation of “teaching away” (Remarks, pg. 9) is not persuasive because Applicant has not articulated a particular disparagement or inoperability in either Chang or Chu. See MPEP 2141.02 and 2143.01.
Conclusion
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 Kurt Sweely whose telephone number is (571)272-8482. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at (571)-272-5166. 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.
/Kurt Sweely/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718