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 .
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 1-8 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 claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation “groove-type field effect transistor biosensor” in line 15. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression (e.g., groove field effect transistor biosensor) extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(E). Claims 2-8 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites “a source electrode and a drain electrode are provided at two ends of the ITO channel layer” in lines 5-7. It is unclear if both source and drain electrodes are provided at each ends or if one of the source and drain electrodes are provided at one end while the other is provided at the other end. Claims 2-8 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claims 4 and 7, claims 4 and 7 recite “SiNx”. The scope of “x” in the term is unclear. Is SiNx a term for a particular silicon nitride or does “x” refer to a number?
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites, “a concave-convex ITO channel layer” in lines 2-3. It is unclear if the concave-convex ITO channel layer of claim 8 is the same or different from the ITO channel layer established in claim 1.
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.
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, 3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (Guo et al., “Indium-tin-oxide thin film transistor biosensors for label-free detection of avian influenza virus H5N1”, Analytica Chimica Acta 773 (2013) 83–88) in view of Hwang et al. (US 20100065892 A1) and Saito (US 20210080426 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Guo teaches a groove-type field effect transistor biosensor (Fig. 1; abstract) based on an atomic layer deposited semiconductor channel (Fig. 1 and abstract teaches the ITO TFT is formed by deposition, therefore is interpreted as based on an atomic layer deposited semiconductor channel) , wherein the groove-type field effect transistor biosensor comprises a substrate (Fig. 1, glass substrate), a high-k dielectric layer (Fig. 1, SiO2) is provided on the substrate (Fig. 1 shows SiO2 is on the glass substrate layer via the ITO gate), an indium tin oxide channel layer (Fig. 1, ITO channel) is provided on the high-k dielectric layer (Fig. 1 shows the ITO channel is on the SiO2), a source electrode (Fig. 1, one of the ITO electrodes) and a drain electrode (Fig. 1, another one of the ITO electrodes) are provided at two ends of the ITO channel layer (Fig. 1).
Guo fails to teach: a plurality of grooves are provided at a surface of the substrate in a spaced manner; and insulating layers are provided on the source electrode and the drain electrode.
Hwang teaches a biosensor including a gate dielectric formed on a silicon semiconductor substrate (abstract), wherein the biosensor is a FET structure (paragraph [0001]). Hwang teaches embodiments of a comb-shaped or lattice-shaped gate electrode between source and drain electrodes (Figs. 2A-2B; paragraph [0014]). Hwang teaches the comb or lattice shaped gate electrodes allows for probe molecules to be attached to upper and side surfaces, which increases the sensitivity of the biosensor (paragraph [0032]). Hwang teaches an embodiment (Fig. 8H) wherein the biosensor comprises a plurality of grooves are provided at a surface a substrate in a spaced manner (Fig. 8H teaches grooves between the gate electrode structures 6, which are provided at a surface of substrate 1 of the biosensor in a spaced manner).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the surface of the substrate of Guo to incorporate the teachings of a plurality of grooves for a FET biosensor of Hwang (Figs. 2A-2B, 8H; paragraph [0032]) to provide: a plurality of grooves are provided at a surface of the substrate in a spaced manner. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully allowing for probe molecules to be attached to both upper and side surfaces, therefore increasing the sensitivity of the biosensor (Hwang, paragraph [0032]).
Modified Guo fails to teach: insulating layers are provided on the source electrode and the drain electrode.
Saito teaches a sensor including electrodes, a channel connecting the electrodes, and an insulating layer covering the electrodes (abstract; Figs. 1,4). Saito teaches the sensor (Fig. 1) comprises a source electrode (4), drain electrode (5), and insulating layers (6) provided on the source and drain electrodes (Fig. 1). Saito teaches the sensor may have a structure of a FET (paragraph [0043]). Saito teaches the insulating layers covers the source and drain electrodes to prevent the electrodes from being in contact with the sample and to prevent corrosion of the electrodes (paragraph [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the source and drain electrodes of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of insulating layers on source and drain electrodes for biosensors of Saito (Figs. 1,4; paragraphs [0017],[0043]) to provide: insulating layers are provided on the source electrode and the drain electrode. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving protection and isolation of the source and drain electrodes from a sample, and thus prevent the electrodes from being in contact with the sample and to prevent corrosion of the electrodes (Saito, paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 3, the limitations of “wherein the substrate is subjected to photoresist spin coating, baking, exposure, development, fixing, dry etching, and photoresist stripping processes, or subjected to photoresist spin coating, baking, nano- imprinting, dry etching, and photoresist stripping processes, so that a flat silicon wafer is prepared into a silicon wafer substrate with the plurality of grooves provided on a surface of the silicon wafer substrate in the spaced manner” are interpreted as a product-by-process limitation (MPEP 2113), wherein determination of patentability is based on the product itself (i.e. a silicon wafer substrate with the plurality of grooves provided on a surface of the silicon wafer substrate in the spaced manner). The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.
Modified Guo fails to teach: a silicon wafer substrate with the plurality of grooves provided on a surface of the silicon wafer substrate in the spaced manner.
Saito teaches the substrate of the biosensor (Fig. 1, element 2) is silicon or glass (paragraph [0030]).
Since Saito teaches a substrate of a biosensor can be silicon or glass (paragraph [0030]), and the function of a substate of silicon or glass is known (paragraph [0030]), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the substrate of modified Guo to provide: a silicon wafer substrate with the plurality of grooves provided on a surface of the silicon wafer substrate in the spaced manner. Doing so would have a predictable result of supporting the biosensor. I.e. It would have been obvious to have substituted one known element (Guo’s glass substrate) for another (Saito’s silicon substrate, i.e. silicon wafer), and the results of the substitution would have been predictable (providing a support for the biosensor, wherein the support has the plurality of grooves on a surface thereof). See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Regarding claim 6, modified Guo fails to teach wherein the source electrode and the drain electrode are one of Au, Ni/Au, and Ni/Au/Ni.
Saito teaches the source and drain electrodes can be metals such as gold or nickel (paragraph [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the source and drain electrodes of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of materials for source and drain electrodes of Saito (paragraph [0039]) to provide: wherein the source electrode and the drain electrode are one of Au, Ni/Au, and Ni/Au/Ni. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully providing electrically conductive electrodes as taught by Saito (paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Guo fails to teach wherein a surface of a concave-convex ITO channel layer is modified with biological probes to specifically capture target biomolecules.
Hwang teaches a biosensor including a gate dielectric formed on a silicon semiconductor substrate (abstract), wherein the biosensor is a FET structure (paragraph [0001]). Hwang teaches embodiments of a comb-shaped or lattice-shaped gate electrode between source and drain electrodes (Figs. 2A-2B; paragraph [0014]). Hwang teaches the comb or lattice shaped gate electrodes allows for probe molecules to be attached to upper and side surfaces, which increases the sensitivity of the biosensor (paragraph [0032]). Hwang teaches an embodiment (Fig. 8H) wherein the biosensor comprises a plurality of grooves are provided at a surface a substrate in a spaced manner (Fig. 8H teaches grooves between the gate electrode structures 6, which are provided at a surface of substrate 1 of the biosensor in a spaced manner), which forms a concave-convex structure (Fig. 8H).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the surface of the substrate of Guo to incorporate the teachings of a plurality of grooves for a FET biosensor of Hwang (Figs. 2A-2B, 8H; paragraph [0032]) and probe molecules attached to upper and side surfaces of the biosensor of Hwang (paragraph [0032]) to provide: wherein a surface of a concave-convex ITO channel layer is modified with biological probes to specifically capture target biomolecules. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully allowing for probe molecules to be attached to both upper and side surfaces, therefore increasing the sensitivity of the biosensor (Hwang, paragraph [0032]).
Claims 2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo in view of Hwang and Saito as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Savoy et al. (US 8450131 B2).
Regarding claim 2, modified Guo fails to teach wherein the substrate is a silicon wafer, a depth of each of the plurality of grooves is 10-200 nm, a convex width is 40-200 nm, and a width of each of the plurality of grooves is 40-200 nm.
Saito teaches the substrate of the biosensor (Fig. 1, element 2) is silicon or glass (paragraph [0030]).
Since Saito teaches a substrate of a biosensor can be silicon or glass (paragraph [0030]), and the function of a substate of silicon or glass is known (paragraph [0030]), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the substrate of modified Guo to provide: wherein the substrate is a silicon wafer. Doing so would have a predictable result of supporting the biosensor. I.e. It would have been obvious to have substituted one known element (Guo’s glass substrate) for another (Saito’s silicon substrate, i.e. silicon wafer), and the results of the substitution would have been predictable (providing a support for the biosensor). See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Modified Guo fails to teach: a depth of each of the plurality of grooves is 10-200 nm, a convex width is 40-200 nm, and a width of each of the plurality of grooves is 40-200 nm.
Savoy teaches a sensor device including a set of semiconducting nanotraces for biomolecular sensing (abstract; Fig. 4E). Savoy teaches a need for a cost-effective, time-efficient, reproducible method for fabricating arrays of nano-scale features on a single wafer to form a sensor device for detection of analytes (column 4, lines 18-24). Savoy teaches a sensor comprising anchored probe molecules, wherein the sensor comprises semiconducting electrode nanotraces in a controllable regular pattern (column 4, lines 28-38). Savoy teaches a plurality of grooves, i.e. nanotraces, on the surface of the silicon dioxide gate dielectric (Fig. 4E shows nanotraces 118 on gate dielectric 106). Savoy teaches the dimensions of nanotraces are critical for increasing the response sensitivity of target molecule binding (column 8, lines 38-41), which is achieved because the surface-to-volume ratio of each nanotrace is large due to the small width and depth of the nanotrace (column 8, lines 41-44). Savoy teaches the nanotraces provides a narrow electrical bridge between a source and drain electrode (column 5, lines 56-60). Savoy teaches dimensions of individual nanotraces range between 1-100 nm in width and depth (column 5, lines 60-64). Savoy teaches nanotraces (Fig. 6B, element 118) with depths less than 200 nm, convex width, i.e. spacing between raised nanotraces, of 200 nm or less, and width of the nanotraces of 200nm or less (Fig. 6B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plurality of grooves of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of dimensions of nanotraces for biomolecular sensing of Savoy (abstract; Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) to provide: a depth of each of the plurality of grooves is 10-200 nm, a convex width is 40-200 nm, and a width of each of the plurality of grooves is 40-200 nm. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving sensitivity of detection of target molecules due to the increased surface to volume ratio of the plurality of grooves as taught by Savoy (column 8, lines 38-44).
Additionally, since Savoy teaches a biosensor comprising a plurality of grooves, similar to modified Guo, and Savoy teaches dimensions of grooves (column 5, lines 60-64; Fig. 6B), which overlaps the claimed ranges, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plurality of grooves of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of dimensions of nanotraces for biomolecular sensing of Savoy (Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) to provide: a depth of each of the plurality of grooves is 10-200 nm, a convex width is 40-200 nm, and a width of each of the plurality of grooves is 40-200 nm. I.e., it would have been prima facia obvious to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges from the taught range of Savoy (Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 4, Guo further teaches wherein the high-k dielectric layer is HfO2, Al2O3, SiO2, or SiNX (Fig. 1, SiO2) , and the high-k dielectric layer is prepared by an atomic layer deposition method (interpreted as a product-by-process limitation, MPEP 2113, wherein determination of patentability is based on the product itself; the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production; Guo teaches a high-k dielectric layer of SiO2, therefore teaches the product). Modified Guo fails to teach the high-k dielectric layer has a thickness of 5-10 nm.
Savoy teaches a sensor device including a set of semiconducting nanotraces for biomolecular sensing (abstract; Fig. 4E). Savoy teaches a silicon dioxide gate dielectric 106 (Fig. 4E, element 106; column 7, lines 19-25), wherein the gate dielectric has a thickness of between 10-200 nm (column 7, lines 23-25). Savoy teaches a plurality of grooves on the surface of the silicon dioxide gate dielectric (Fig. 4E shows nanotraces 118 on gate dielectric 106).
Since Savoy teaches silicon dioxide supporting a plurality of grooves, similar to modified Guo, and Savoy teaches a silicon dioxide dielectric layer with a thickness of between 10-200 nm (column 7, lines 23-25), wherein the range of between 10-200 nm overlaps with or is merely close to the claimed range of 5-10 nm, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the high-k dielectric layer of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of a thickness of a silicon dioxide gate dielectric of Savoy (column 7, lines 23-25) to provide: the high-k dielectric layer has a thickness of 5-10 nm. I.e., it would have been prima facia obvious to have selected the overlapping portion of the range (i.e. 10 nm) from the taught range of between 10-200 nm of Savoy (column 7, lines 23-25) (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 5, Guo further teaches wherein the ITO channel layer is prepared by an atomic layer deposition method (interpreted as a product-by-process limitation, MPEP 2113, wherein determination of patentability is based on the product itself; the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production; Guo teaches the ITO channel layer in Fig. 1).
Modified Guo fails to teach the ITO channel layer has a thickness of 10-20 nm, and the ITO channel layer is concave-convex and has a groove depth of 10-200 nm, a groove width of 20-300 nm, and a convex ITO width of 10-100 nm.
Savoy teaches a sensor device including a set of semiconducting nanotraces for biomolecular sensing (abstract; Fig. 4E). Savoy teaches a need for a cost-effective, time-efficient, reproducible method for fabricating arrays of nano-scale features on a single wafer to form a sensor device for detection of analytes (column 4, lines 18-24). Savoy teaches a sensor comprising anchored probe molecules, wherein the sensor comprises semiconducting electrode nanotraces in a controllable regular pattern (column 4, lines 28-38). Savoy teaches a plurality of grooves, i.e. nanotraces, on the surface of the silicon dioxide gate dielectric (Fig. 4E shows nanotraces 118 on gate dielectric 106), which form a concave-convex structure (Fig. 4E). Savoy teaches the dimensions of nanotraces are critical for increasing the response sensitivity of target molecule binding (column 8, lines 38-41), which is achieved because the surface-to-volume ratio of each nanotrace is large due to the small width and depth of the nanotrace (column 8, lines 41-44). Savoy teaches the nanotraces provides a narrow electrical bridge between a source and drain electrode (column 5, lines 56-60). Savoy teaches dimensions of individual nanotraces range between 1-100 nm in width and depth (column 5, lines 60-64). Savoy teaches nanotraces (Fig. 6B, element 118) with depths less than 200 nm, convex width, i.e. spacing between raised nanotraces, of 200 nm or less, and width of the nanotraces of 200nm or less (Fig. 6B). Savoy teaches a silicon dioxide gate dielectric 106 (Fig. 4E, element 106; column 7, lines 19-25), wherein the gate dielectric has a thickness of between 10-200 nm (column 7, lines 23-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ITO channel layer of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of dimensions of nanotraces for biomolecular sensing of Savoy (abstract; Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) to provide: the ITO channel layer has a thickness of 10-20 nm, and the ITO channel layer is concave-convex and has a groove depth of 10-200 nm, a groove width of 20-300 nm, and a convex ITO width of 10-100 nm. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving sensitivity of detection of target molecules due to the increased surface to volume ratio of the plurality of grooves as taught by Savoy (column 8, lines 38-44).
Additionally, since Savoy teaches a biosensor comprising a plurality of grooves, similar to modified Guo, and Savoy teaches dimensions of grooves (column 5, lines 60-64; Fig. 6B), which overlaps the claimed ranges, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ITO channel layer of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of dimensions of nanotraces for biomolecular sensing of Savoy (Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) to provide: the ITO channel layer has a thickness of 10-20 nm, and the ITO channel layer is concave-convex and has a groove depth of 10-200 nm, a groove width of 20-300 nm, and a convex ITO width of 10-100 nm. I.e., it would have been prima facia obvious to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges from the taught range of Savoy (Figs. 4E, 6B; column 5, lines 60-64) (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo in view of Hwang and Saito as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ren et al. (US 20110068372 A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Guo fails to teach wherein the insulating layers are SU-8, PMMA, SiO2, or SiNX.
Saito teaches insulating materials include ceramics of oxide film and insulating polymers (paragraph [0042]).
Ren et al. (US 20110068372 A1) teaches biosensors having functionalization at a gate surface with target receptors (abstract; Figs. 1-2). Ren teaches the biosensor (Fig. 1) comprises source and drain electrodes (103,104), and insulating layers (Fig. 1, protective films 105) are provided on the source electrode and the drain electrode (Fig. 1). Ren teaches the insulating layers are disposed on the device while exposing the gate electrode (paragraph [0044]). Ren teaches a protective layer to encapsulate the source/drain regions, with only the gate region exposed to allow the liquid solutions to access the bare Au-gate or functionalized Au-gate surface (paragraph [0080]). Ren teaches a protective layer can be PMMA (paragraph [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the insulating layers of modified Guo to incorporate the teachings of insulating layers comprising PMMA of Ren (paragraph [0060]) and the teachings of insulating polymers of Saito (paragraph [0042]) to provide: wherein the insulating layers is PMMA. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully protecting the electrodes as taught by Ren (paragraph [0060],[0080]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hwang et al. (MICHAEL TAEYOUNG HWANG, et al., Ultrasensitive detection of nucleic acids using deformed graphene channel field effect biosensors, Nature Communications, 2020, pp.1-11, Vol.11, No.1543; cited in the IDS filed 03/01/2023) teaches a FET biosensor (Fig. 1a) comprising a source and drain electrode (Fig. 1), wherein the sensor comprises a convex-concave structure with probes immobilized thereon (Fig. 1)
Zhang et al. (US 20160202254 A1) teaches a biosensing FTE device (abstract). Zhang teaches an embodiment (Fig. 5A) comprising a source and drain (Fig. 5A), silicon wafer substrate (Fig. 5A), high-k dielectric layer (SiO2) on the substrate (Fig. 5A), and a channel with nanopores between the source and drain electrodes (Fig. 5A, wherein the nanopores have diameters of 10-20 nm (paragraph [0023]).
Kinser et al. (US 11013437 B2) teaches a biosensor (abstract; Fig. 9) comprising individually articulated features 20P of the electrode structure (Fig. 9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2338. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30A-5:00P.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/HENRY H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758