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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made to Applicant’s claim to priority to foreign priority to Singaporean Application No. SG10202201454R filed February 15, 2022.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of the subject matter of Species I with traverse in the reply filed on 01/12/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s arguments with respect to restriction has been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, previously held restriction has been withdrawn. Thus, claims 1-23 are presently pending in this application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding figures 4-5, photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. The Office will accept photographs in utility and design patent applications, however, if photographs are the only practicable medium for illustrating the claimed invention. See 37 CFR 1.84 (b)(1).
Regarding pages 4-9 of the drawing, the figure numbering/designation are not labeled properly and inconsistent with the specifications.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 11, and 14-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 recites, “resonant inductive charger and/or radio frequency based charger” in ln 2 which Examiner suggest amending to read --a resonant inductive charger and/or a radio frequency based charger--
Claim 14 recites, “in magnetic field” in ln 2 which Examiner suggest amending to read --in a magnetic field--
Claim 15 recites, “on electrical current” in ln 2 which Examiner suggest amending to read --on an electrical current--
Claim 16 recites, “a patient interface” in ln 3 which Examiner suggest amending to read --the patient interface-- as it is introduced in claim 1.
Claims 17-23 are objected by the dependency to claim 16.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-15 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.
Claim 12 recites, “the controller is configured to cut power to the controllable motor-blower on determining that the patient interface is secured to the anchor”. However, the claim define the controller solely by the result it achieves, rather than by what the controller is or how it interacts with other components/structural limitation to achieve the recited result such as the components for electrical communications as described in ¶0220-0229, 0281-0298, any sensing means or an electrical component associated with the centralized processor/the controller or any structural or algorithmic features enabling the controller to make such determination via the anchor. Claim recites the feature “by what it does rather than by what it is”. See MPEP § 2173.05(g). Thus, the claim renders indefinite as one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the controller, resulting in uncertain claim boundaries.
Claim 15 is rejected by dependency to claim 12.
Further, claim 15 recites that the controller is configured to determined the state of the patient interface in view of the anchor based on “electrical current flowing through the anchor”. However, the claim does not define how the controller achieves without further defining the anchor with sufficient structure such as circuitry, detection mechanism or sensors. Thus, the claim renders indefinite.
Claim 13 recites, “wherein the controller is configured to supply power to the controllable motor-blower on determining that the patient interface is not secured to the anchor”. However, the claim define the controller solely by the result it achieves, rather than by what the controller is or how it interacts with other components/structural limitation to achieve the recited result such as the components for electrical communications as described in ¶0220-0229, 0281-0298, any sensing means or an electrical component associated with the centralized processor/the controller or any structural or algorithmic features enabling the controller to make such determination via the anchor. Claim recites the feature “by what it does rather than by what it is”. See MPEP § 2173.05(g). Thus, the claim renders indefinite as one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the controller, resulting in uncertain claim boundaries.
Claim 14 recites, “wherein the controller determines whether the patient interface is secured to the anchor based on changes in magnetic field”. However, the claim define the controller solely by the result it achieves, rather than by what the controller is or how it interacts with other components/structural limitation to achieve the recited result such as a transmitting coil, a receiving coil, a resonant coil, or other components as described in ¶0240-0241. Claim recites the feature “by what it does rather than by what it is”. See MPEP § 2173.05(g). Thus, the claim renders indefinite as one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the controller, resulting in uncertain claim boundaries.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 9-11, 16-18, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shelly et al. (US 20150296550 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shelly et al. discloses, an apparatus (22, Fig 2) for providing positive pressure respiratory therapy to a patient breathing in a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion (¶0033, 0036-0038, generates a flow of breathing gas for delivery to the patient at relative higher and lower pressure and having a delivery conduit and an exhaust conduit) said apparatus comprising:
a controllable motor-blower (40, Fig 3) configured to generate a supply of air at a positive pressure relative to ambient pressure (¶0033, 0036-0039);
a controller (46, Fig 3) configured to adjust operation of said motor-blower (¶0039-0042); and
a housing (36 of 22 as shown in Fig 2) holding said motor-blower,
the housing including an anchor (a docking module 38, Fig 2; ¶0043, “docking module 38 is provided as an integral part of housing 36”) configured to secure a patient interface (28, Fig 2) to the apparatus when not in use by the patient (¶0043, “includes a housing 52 that is shaped to receive and hold mask component 30”).
Regarding claim 3, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor is positioned on an external surface of the housing (the docking module is arranged on exterior of the housing as shown in Fig 2)
Regarding claim 4, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor is magnetic (¶0043, “housing…a magnetic feature”).
Regarding claim 5, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor is configured to provide a clearance (a space between the mask and the housing as shown in Fig 5) between the patient interface and the housing when the patient interface is secured to the housing.
Regarding claim 6, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor includes, a strap, or an interlocking mechanism. (¶0043, “housing 52 may have one or more of a tray-like shape, a hanging feature, a magnetic feature, a clip, a strap and/or another feature to receive either part or all of mask component”)
Regarding claim 9, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor comprises a connector (a coupling inductor 39, Figs 2and 6) for electrical communication between the patient interface and the apparatus (¶0043-44, “charging…coupling inductor 39 of docking module 38 such that coupling inductor 35 will be within the near-field of coupling inductor…coupled to oscillator circuit 58 to enable control of both power and data).
Regarding claim 10, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the anchor comprises a charger (¶0043-0044).
Regarding claim 11, Shelly et al. discloses, the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the charger is an inductive charger (¶0034-35, 0043-48, implies that the charger is an inductive charger)
Regarding claim 16, Shelly et al. discloses, a system comprising an apparatus for providing positive pressure respiratory therapy to a patient breathing in a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion according to claim 1 (as discussed above in claim 1)
a patient interface (28, Fig 2) having a complementary structure (a wireless peripheral device 32 of the mask component 30, Fig 4) that engages the anchor of the apparatus (¶0034-35, 0043-48, implies engaging for both power and data).
Regarding claim 17, Shelly et al. discloses, the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the complementary structure is defined by the patient interface (the wireless peripheral device is defined by the patient interface as shown in Fig 4).
Regarding claim 18, Shelly et al. discloses, the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the patient interface includes a flat surface and the complementary structure is defined by said flat surface (the complementary structure has a flat surface which is part of the patient interface as shown in Fig 4).
Regarding claim 21, Shelly et al. discloses, the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the complementary structure is magnetic (Examiner interprets magnetic as to any material or component that interacts with, or is capable of interacting with a magnetic field or magnetic forces as BRI; ¶0048, the coupling inductor of the wireless peripheral device).
Regarding claim 23, Shelly et al. discloses, the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Shelley et al. further disclose, wherein the patient interface is structured to be oriented in an upright position (the patient interface is positioned in the upright position relative to the housing 52 of the docking module 38 as shown in Fig 5) when the anchor and the complementary structure are engaged.
Claims 1, 3, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Salmon et al. (US 20210205553 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Salmon et al. discloses, an apparatus (an assembly of Fig 13) for providing positive pressure respiratory therapy to a patient breathing in a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion (¶0389-0395, a breathing assistance apparatus providing respiratory assistance to patient at positive pressure; ¶0429-430, “..can be used with breathing therapies, positive pressure apparatus…can be used with continuous, variable, or bi-level PAP systems or other form of respiratory therapy…described in WO 2015/038013”),
said apparatus comprising:
a controllable motor-blower (11 of the breathing assistance apparatus 10, Fig 1; ¶0395, “a flow generator 11 in the form of a motor/impeller arrangement… controller 13 is configured or programmed to control the components of the apparatus, including: operating the flow generator 11 to create a flow of gas”) configured to generate a supply of air at a positive pressure relative to ambient pressure (¶0389-0395, 0429-0430);
a controller (13 of the breathing assistance apparatus 10, Fig 1) configured to adjust operation of said motor-blower (¶0395,0397-0398); and
a housing (a support apparatus 200, Figs 4-14; ¶0433, “used to support, hold and carry …one or more accessories of the apparatus…such as the conduit…patient interface such as a cannula”) holding said motor-blower,
the housing including an anchor (the mechanical feature 311, Figs 4-14) configured to secure a patient interface to the apparatus when not in use by the patient (¶0433, 0477-0479, 0483-0491, implies that the accessories such as conduit, patient interface and etc. can be hung via the mechanical features 311, 313, and 315 or suitable configuration comprising: a recess or groove; a clip; a hinge mechanism; a compliant sling or strap; a hook and loop fastener; or any other suitable configuration).
Regarding claim 3, Salmon et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the anchor is positioned on an external surface of the housing (the mechanical features are arranged exterior surface of the housing as shown in Figs 4-14).
Regarding claim 5, Salmon et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the anchor is configured to provide a clearance (the patient interface can be hung or any suitable arrangement as described in ¶0433, 0477-0479, 0483-0491. Examiner notes interprets the clearance as to any distance between the hung interface and any portion of the housing such as upstanding members, base, handle, etc.) between the patient interface and the housing when the patient interface is secured to the housing.
Regarding claim 6, Salmon et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the anchor includes a strap, or a hook and/or loop fastener (¶0433, 0477-0479, 0483-0491, “suitable configuration comprising: a recess or groove; a clip; a hinge mechanism; a compliant sling or strap; a hook and loop fastener”).
Regarding claim 7, Salmon et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon et al. further discloses, a humidifier (¶0389-0395, 0429-0430, the apparatus comprises a humidifier), the anchor being positioned so as to not hinder a user from removing the humidifier from the apparatus (the humidifier can be removed without the mechanical feature obstructing from doing so as shown in Figs 8-11).
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.
Claims 1-3, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmon (US 20180147374 A1) in view Wixey et al. (US Pat 7478635).
Regarding claim 1, Salmon discloses, an apparatus (an assembly of 200, Fig 4) for providing positive pressure respiratory therapy to a patient breathing (¶0202, “the support assembly may be used with an apparatus for a different purpose… for providing continuous positive airway pressure), said apparatus comprising:
a controllable motor-blower (11 of a breathing assistance apparatus 10, Fig 1) configured to generate a supply of air at a positive pressure relative to ambient pressure (¶0101, “a flow generator 11 in the form of a motor/impeller arrangement…The controller 13 is configured or programmed to control the components of the apparatus, including: operating the flow generator 11 to create a flow of gas”);
a controller (13 of a breathing assistance apparatus 10, Fig 1) configured to adjust operation of said motor-blower (¶0101-0103, “controls the flow generator 11 to generate a gas flow of the desired flow rate, controls one or more valves to control the mix of air and oxygen or other alternative gas, and controls the humidifier 12 if present to humidify the gas flow and/or heat the gas flow to an appropriate level”); and
a housing (a stand 201, Fig 4; ¶0122-126, “the apparatus 10 has a mount 127 for mounting the apparatus to a support”; ¶0127, “used to support and hold the apparatus 10 and/or accessories of the apparatus”) holding said motor-blower,
the housing including an anchor (235 of a holder 231 as shown in Fig 4) which is configured to secure a patient interface (¶0141-0142, “ a shape that is complementary to the shape of the conduit and/or patient interface such as a cannula to be held by the mechanical feature(s)… a recess or groove; a clip; a hinge mechanism; a compliant sling or strap; a hook and loop fastener; or any other suitable configuration) to the apparatus when not in use by the patient.
While Salmon discloses the support assembly may be used with an apparatus for a different purpose (¶0202), Salmon is silent on the breathing assistance apparatus for providing a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion.
However, Wixey et al. which is analogous art to the claimed invention teaches the apparatus (100, Fig 3) providing a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion (Col 5, ln 62-66, “different levels of delivered pressure for inhalation versus exhalation and automatically calibrating the pressure level depending on symptoms exhibited by the patient) in order to provide breathing assistance based on the symptoms of the patient.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Salmon to include the breathing assistance apparatus for providing a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion as taught by Wixey et al. in order to provide breathing assistance based on the symptoms of the patient.
Regarding claim 2, Salmon discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon further discloses, wherein the anchor is removable from the housing (¶0133, 0138, “to releasably mount the base 203 of the stand to the holder 231”).
Regarding claim 3, Salmon discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon further discloses, wherein the anchor is positioned on an external surface of the housing (the mechanical feature is on an external surface of the housing via the holder as shown in Fig 4).
Regarding claim 5, Salmon discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon further discloses, wherein the anchor (the mechanical feature is at distant from the base as shown in Fig 4. Examiner note that the clearance would be provided when the patient interface is hung as described in ¶0141-0142) is configured to provide a clearance between the patient interface and the housing when the patient interface is secured to the housing.
Regarding claim 6, Salmon discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon further discloses, wherein the anchor includes a strap, or a hook and/or loop fastener (¶0141-0142).
Regarding claim 7, Salmon discloses the apparatus of claim 1 as discussed above.
Salmon further discloses, further comprising a humidifier (12, Fig 1), the anchor being positioned (the breathing assistance apparatus can be removed as shown in Fig 26) so as to not hinder a user from removing the humidifier from the apparatus.
Claims 16, 19-20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmon et al. (US 20210205553 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Allan et al. (US 20170119988 A1).
Regarding claim 16, a system comprising an apparatus (an assembly of Fig 13) for providing positive pressure respiratory therapy to a patient breathing in a respiratory cycle including an inhalation portion and an exhalation portion (¶0389-0395, a breathing assistance apparatus providing respiratory assistance to patient at positive pressure; ¶0429-430, “..can be used with breathing therapies, positive pressure apparatus…can be used with continuous, variable, or bi-level PAP systems or other form of respiratory therapy…described in WO 2015/038013”), according to claim 1 (see rejection under U.S.C. §102 in view of Salmon et al. as discussed above).
While Salmon et all. Discloses, the anchor of the apparatus engages with the patient interface in various configuration as well as merely hanging the patient interface from the anchor (¶0433, 0477-0479, 0483-0491), Salmon is silent on the structure of the patient interface such as having a complementary structure.
However, Allan et al. which is analogous art to the claim invention as well as same inventor, teaches the patient interface (interface 100, Fig 1A) with a complementary structure (a single strap 128 with the straps 126, Figs 1A-1B) in order to secure the interface to the patient (¶0115).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Salmon et al. to include the complementary structure of the patient interface as taught by Allen et al. in order to secure the interface to the patient. Examiner notes that the any strap of the patient interface is capable of hanging onto the mechanical features of the Salmon et al. without any unexpected result.
Regarding claim 19, Salmon et al. discloses the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Modified Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the complementary structure is an attachment or accessory (Allan et al.: straps 126, 128 are attached to the interface as shown in Figs 1A-1B) provided to the patient interface.
Regarding claim 20, Salmon et al. discloses the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Modified Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the complementary structure includes a strap (Allan et al.: straps 126, 128).
Regarding claim 22, Salmon et al. discloses the system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Modified Salmon et al. further discloses, wherein the complementary structure (Allan et al.: straps 126, 128 are removably attached to the interface as shown in Figs 1A-1B) is removable from the patient interface.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, and 12-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection and the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding the subject matters of claims 8, and 12-15, the closest identified prior art document of the record is Shelly et al. (US 20150296550 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Shelly et al. discloses the anchor can have magnetic features to receive the mask portion (¶0043), but Shelly et al. does not specifically teach or suggest wherein the anchor is configured to secure the patient interface in a contactless manner such that there is no physical contact between the anchor and the mask which may involve repelling magnetic forces as described in ¶0216-0219 of the instant application.
Regarding claims 12-15, Shelly et al. discloses the anchor (38, Fig 6) is operatively coupled to a power source and further comprises a controller to enable control of both power and data (¶0044) and during the secured state (¶0046-48, a docked state), the mask portion is charged as well as used for the data transfer via a pairing mode, but Shelly et al. does not specifically teach or suggest that the controller determines the patient is secured in order to enable/disable power to the motor-blower or detecting the securement via the changes in magnetic field.
No other prior arts have been found that teaches or suggest all the claimed features of the claims 8, and 12-15 respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
King (US 20220126046 A1) is cited for a rechargeable CPAP system with a charging station which holds the system as shown in Fig 2.
Klinger et al. (US 20180272086 A1) is cited for the CPAP machine storage stand which has a mechanical feature to hold the patient interface as shown in Fig 5.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEICK JANG whose telephone number is (703)756-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 4:30.
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, Kendra D Carter can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
/J.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/JOSEPH D. BOECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785