DETAILED ACTION
This final rejection is responsive to communication filed October 8, 2025. Claims 1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15 and 16 are currently amended. Claims 3, 6, 11, and 14 are canceled. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-10, 12, 13, 15, and 16 are pending in this application.
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 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, 5, 7-10, 12, 13, 15, and 16 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.
Claims 1 and 9 have been amended to recite “generating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, an updated item data model based on the stored item data model, known item data, and user specific information” and “updating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model to produce a new item data model, wherein the updating includes: training, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model based on the one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized, and interpreted item data and removing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, user specific information from the updated item data model.” The specification does not appear to provide support for these limitations. For example, the specification does not describe generating an updated item data model based on the stored item data model, known item data, and user specific information. There is no mention of updating a model. In fact, the specification only mentions a stored data model associated with data access points (paragraphs 100 and 118).
Further, the specification does not describe producing a new item data model by training the updated item data model and removing user specific information. The specification does not even mention a new item data model or removing user specific information, and the only training mentioned is “the smart data scraping module 130 is "trained" to spot data related to items” (paragraph 91). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-10, 12, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1 and 9 recite the following limitations directed to an abstract idea:
identify a stored item data model related to item data from the one or more active item data access points (mental process: a user can think about or mentally identify a stored item data model);
generating an updated item data model based on the stored item data model, known item data, and user specific information (mental process: a user can manually generate an updated item data model based on specific data; further the specification does not describe how this updated item data model is generated);
comparing the item data from the one or more active data access points to the updated item data model to identify relevant item data from the data item from the one or more active data access points (mental process: a user can think about or mentally compare item data using observation and evaluation);
parsing the relevant item data to produce parsed item data in a desired database format (mental process: a user can mentally parse data);
tagging the parsed item data based on item categories to produce categorized item data (mental process: a user mentally or manually tag/categorize data).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
an item data extraction and management computing entity to perform recites steps (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
a computing device of a plurality of computing devices wherein the computing device includes a plurality of data access points (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
wherein the computing device is associated with the item data extraction and management computing entity via an item data extraction and management user interface (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
one or more databases operably coupled to the item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, an indication that one or more active item data access points of a plurality of data access points of a computing device of the multi-access point item data extraction and management system are active (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
accessing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more databases of the item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
selectively extracting, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the relevant item data from the one or more active data access points based on the identification (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
appending, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, metadata to the categorized item data based on one or more item category characteristics to produce interpreted item data (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized and interpreted item data in a user storage section of the one or more databases dedicated to the computing device (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
updating by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model to produce a new item data model, wherein the updating includes: training, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model based on the one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized, and interpreted item data and removing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, user specific information from the updated item data model (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f) – Examiner’s note: high level recitation of training a model with previously determined data);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the new item data model in a shared storage section of the one or more databases (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
a computing device of a plurality of computing devices wherein the computing device includes a plurality of data access points (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
wherein the computing device is associated with the item data extraction and management computing entity via an item data extraction and management user interface (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
one or more databases operably coupled to the item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, an indication that one or more active item data access points of a plurality of data access points of a computing device of the multi-access point item data extraction and management system are active (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that “receiving and transmitting data over a network” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim));
accessing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more databases of the item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception);
selectively, extracting, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the relevant item data from the one or more active data access points based on the identification (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that “electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim));
appending, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, metadata to the categorized item data based on one or more item category characteristics to produce interpreted item data (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “storing and retrieving information in memory” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim))
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more of the relevant, parsed, and interpreted item data in a user storage section of the one or more databases dedicated to the computing device (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “storing and retrieving information in memory” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim));
updating by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model to produce a new item data model, wherein the updating includes: training, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model based on the one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized, and interpreted item data and removing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, user specific information from the updated item data model (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f) – Examiner’s note: high level recitation of training a model with previously determined data);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the new item data model in a shared storage section of the one or more databases (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “storing and retrieving information in memory” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim).
Claims 2 and 10 recite the following limitations directed to an abstract idea:
monitoring actions of the computing device - (mental process – user can look at computer or think about actions or user can monitor actions of a computer printed on a paper, like a log file or image).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
a computing device of a plurality of computing devices wherein the computing device includes a plurality of data access points (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
when an action of the actions is a triggering action: receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the indication that a data access point of the one or more active data access points related to the triggering action is active – (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
a computing device of a plurality of computing devices wherein the computing device includes a plurality of data access points (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
when an action of the actions is a triggering action: receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the indication that a data access point of the one or more active data access points related to the triggering action is active – (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “receiving and transmitting data over a network” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim)).
Claims 4 and 12 do not recite any other limitations directed to the abstract idea.
However, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
obtaining, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, a user input regarding the relevant item data (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
obtaining, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, a user input regarding the relevant item data - (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “receiving and transmitting data over a network” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim)).
Claims 5 and 13 recite the following limitations directed to an abstract idea:
identifying, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the item data by one or more of: analyzing image item data to determine the item data (mental process – user can mentally analyze image data).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
smart scraping the item data from the one the one or more active data access points - (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity); and
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
smart scraping the item data from the one the one or more active data access points - (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that “electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim)).
Claims 7 and 15 do not recite any additional, i.e. outside of those in claims 1 and 9, limitations directed to the abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model in the user storage section of the one or more databases – (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model in the user storage section of the one or more databases – (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicates that merely “storing and retrieving information in memory” is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is in the present claim)).
Claims 8 and 16 recite the following limitations directed to an abstract idea:
indexing the parsed item data to produce indexed, parsed item data – (mental process – user can mentally or manually index data).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as follows:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The following limitations, when considered individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
an item data extraction and management computing entity (Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-10, 12, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Craft (US 2021/0133160 A1) in view of Nakamura (US 2016/0283605 A1).
With respect to claims 1 and 9, Craft teaches a method executable by an item data extraction and management computing entity of a multi-access point item data extraction and management system, the method comprises:
receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity (paragraphs 65-66), an indication that one or more active item data access points of a plurality of data access points (sources such as POS, email, browser, receipts, apps, scanned docs, uploaded files, etc.) of a computing device of the multi-access point item data extraction and management system are active (source is available for supplying data) (paragraphs 85-87 and 94-96), wherein the computing device is associated with the item data extraction and management computing entity via an item data extraction and management user interface (paragraphs 52 and 58);
comparing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the item data from the one or more active data access points to identify relevant item data from the item data from the one or more active data access points (Items may be added to a virtual repository via manual entry, 3rd party sources that include purchase histories from accounts accessible online, and applications/plug-ins that monitor user’s browser activity and emails for purchase data. Data may be extracted from receipts attached to emails. A browser plugin or add-on may monitor for purchase activity by identifying online shopping cart features or purchase controls, and data may be extracted from scripts for displayed screens. Extraction entails identifying the information using keyword and pattern recognition, and saving and associating the identified information with the type of information (e.g., saving a numerical value as a price, and saving a name as a merchant, and saving an alphanumeric code as a product id). Lastly, fig. 14 is a data model that illustrates exemplary data for a virtual repository with item data such as item records, which include the user id, an item id, a virtual repository id, a product code such as a UPC code, a name for the item, and a date for the item, among other data. Such other data may include descriptions, comments, affiliate program links, photographs and pictograms for the item) (paragraphs 86-88 and 94-99 and 103);
selectively extracting, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the relevant item data from the one or more active data access points based on the identification (the relevant fields of data are extracted) (paragraphs 86-88 and 94-98);
parsing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the relevant item data to produce parsed item data in a desired database format (determining relevant field data; performing OCR) (paragraphs 85, 87, and 97 and 98);
tagging, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the parsed item data based on item categories to produce categorized item data () (paragraphs 57, 90, 103, 192, 210, 220 and 339);
appending, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, metadata to the categorized item data based on one or more item category characteristics to produce interpreted item data (paragraphs 98, 103, 118, 192, and 220);
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more of the relevant, parsed, and interpreted item data in a user storage section of the one or more databases dedicated to the computing device (step 1065 in Fig. 13; paragraphs 88, 94-97);
updating item data and user specific information in a virtual repository (paragraphs 71 and 333);
removing data from the virtual repository (paragraphs 75, 84 and 88); and
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, new item data in a shared storage section of the one or more databases (paragraphs 57, 76, 82, 112).
Craft does not explicitly teach accessing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more databases of the item data extraction and management computing entity to identify a stored item data model related to item data from the one or more active item data access points: generating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, an updated item data model based on the stored item data model, known item data, and user specific information; comparing the item data from the one or more active data access points to the updated item data model; updating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model to produce a new item data model, wherein the updating includes: training, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model based on the one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized, and interpreted item data and removing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, user specific information from the updated item data model: and storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the new item data model in the one or more database.
Nakamura teaches accessing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, one or more databases of the item data extraction and management computing entity to identify a stored item data model related to item data from the one or more active item data access points (i.e. reading structured model information) (paragraphs 42-43, 64-65);
generating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, an updated item data model based on the stored item data model, known item data, and user specific information (paragraphs 92-93, 98-99 and 103);
comparing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the item data from the one or more active data access points (i.e. web data) to the updated item data model to identify relevant item data from the item data from the one or more active data access points (paragraphs 43 and 64-65);
updating, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model to produce a new item data model (paragraphs 92-93, 98-99 and 103), wherein the updating includes:
training, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model based on the one or more of the relevant, parsed, categorized, and interpreted item data (i.e. learning to re-create model) (paragraphs 69, 86, 91-93 and 98-99); and
removing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, user specific information from the updated item data model (i.e. correcting incorrect information and re-creating model) (paragraphs 91-92, 98 and 103); and
storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the new item data model in the one or more database (paragraphs 92 and 100).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Craft to identify a stored item data model, update by training the item data model, and store the new item data model as taught by Nakamura to enable improved extraction of item data by learning and correcting incorrect information to re-create a model with correct information (Nakamura, paragraphs 91-93). Further, Craft teaches the incorporation of machine learning into his system (i.e. paragraph 234) and thus combining the learning features of Nakamura would achieve a predictable, smart extraction system.
With respect to claims 2 and 10, Craft in view of Nakamura teaches further comprises: monitoring, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, actions of the computing device (Craft, paragraphs 52, 87, and 96); and
when an action of the actions is a triggering action: receiving, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the indication that a data access point of the one or more active data access points related to the triggering action is active (Craft, paragraphs 85-87 and 94).
With respect to claims 4 and 12, Craft in view of Nakamura teaches wherein the selectively extracting the relevant item data comprises:
obtaining, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, a user input regarding the relevant item data (Craft, paragraphs 85, 94 and 97).
With respect to claims 5 and 13, Craft in view of Nakamura teaches wherein the comparing the item data from the one or more active data access points to the updated item data model comprises: identifying, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the item data by one or more of:
smart scraping, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the relevant item data from the one the one or more active data access points (Craft, paragraphs 94-95 and 98; also, Nakamura, paragraphs 64-65); and
analyzing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, image item data to determine the item data(Craft, paragraphs 97-98).
With respect to claims 7 and 15, Craft in view of Nakamura teaches further, storing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the updated item data model (Nakamura, paragraphs 92 and 100) in the user storage section of the one or more databases (Craft, paragraphs 88, 94-97).
With respect to claims 8 and 16, Craft in view of Nakamura teaches indexing, by the item data extraction and management computing entity, the parsed item data to produce indexed, parsed item data (Craft, paragraphs 82, 109, 242 and 245).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 8, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the claims, as amended, overcome the 35 USC 101 rejections. The examiner disagrees. The amended claims are rejected as explained above.
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
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 ALICIA M WILLOUGHBY whose telephone number is (571)272-5599. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30, EST, M-F.
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, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at 571-272-3906. 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.
/ALICIA M WILLOUGHBY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156