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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 10-11, and 19 are currently amended.
Claims 9 and 21-40 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 6-7, filed 6/9/2026, have been fully considered but they are
not persuasive.
35 U.S.C. 101:
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that the amended limitation, “acquire a source
electrocardiogram image of a target patient by selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline,” recite operations that cannot be performed in the human mind. After careful consideration, the examiner argues that the limitation, “acquire a source electrocardiogram image of a target patient using a photographing unit,” cannot be performed in the human, but recite pre-solution activity to the step of data gathering. Furthermore, the examiner argues that the step, “selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline,” recites an improvement in the diagnostic step of presenting a patient’s ECG signal in a smaller standardized frame.
The applicant further argues that the amended limitation of claim 1 integrates the alleged abstract idea into a practical application in the form of a concrete image-acquisition and processing procedures that yields a standardized source ECG image for subsequent server-side evaluation. The examiner respectfully disagrees and argues that us a processor to “select a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline” recite computer implementation to perform the abstract idea of adjusting the size of a photograph using reference points. The examiner argues that a physician is fully capable of selecting ,for example, four reference points and adjusting/rendering the size of a picture using formulas and equations based on the reference points. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 6/9/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s)
1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly applied Lyman and Devam.
35 U.S.C. 103:
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Lyman, alone or in combination with the prior art, does
not teach “selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline.” After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on the combination of Lyman (paragraph 345) and Devam (paragraph 348) to teach this limitation.
Lyman discloses “the pre-processing of the image data includes adjusting scale of the entire image by a factor necessary to adjust the size of the scale marker in the captured image to a known baseline size (paragraph 345).”
However, Lyman does not explicitly disclose selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image.
Devam teaches a system for rendering images and further teaches a number of reference points (N) are selected, either at predefined coordinates or by some other means of selection, which can be used to determine a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline (paragraph 348).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adjusting scale of Lyman to add the selection of reference points from Devam for the benefit of eliminating non-essential photographic information while maintaining a clear ECG image.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 recite an apparatus with instructions for performing operations of the device comprising:
provide a reported feedback based on the evaluation information, wherein the evaluation information comprises one or more of first diagnostic information including an electrocardiogram image and a result of evaluation of a heart rhythm of the target patient;
wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information.
selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline;
To determine whether a claim satisfies the criteria for subject matter eligibility, the claim is
evaluated according to a stepwise process as described in MPEP 2106(III) and 2106.03-2106.05. The instant claims are evaluated according to such analysis.
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 1 is directed to an apparatus with instructions to perform the diagnostic step and thus meet the requirements for step 1.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural
phenomenon?
Claim 1 recite an apparatus with instructions for performing operations of the device comprising:
provide a reported feedback based on the evaluation information, wherein the evaluation information comprises one or more of first diagnostic information including an electrocardiogram image and a result of evaluation of a heart rhythm of the target patient;
wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information.
selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline;
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the
limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 1 recite an abstract idea of a mental process.
Claim 1 recite the abstract idea of a mental process. The limitations as drafted in the
claims, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the claimed steps in the mind, but for the recitation of a generic processor. Other than reciting a generic processing system and memory, nothing in the elements of the claims precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or manually by a clinician. For example:
“Provide a reported feedback based on the evaluation information, wherein the evaluation information comprises one or more of first diagnostic information including an electrocardiogram image and a result of evaluation of a heart rhythm of the target patient;” A physician may provide feedback comprising a graphical image of an electrocardiogram once collected by the sensors and evaluation of heart rhythm based on an analytical observation of said graph.
“Wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information.” A physician may provide two diagnostic information on separate areas of a canvas or display. One comprising an electrocardiogram image and another to provide diagnostic information.
“Selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline;” A physician is fully capable of selecting ,for example, four reference points and adjusting/rendering the size of a picture using formulas and equations based on the reference points.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial
exception into a practical application?
Claims 1, 2, 7, and 9 recite the additional elements of a “photographing unit”, “a processor”, “a display unit”, “a user terminal”, “a photographing unit”, and “a database” which are being interpreted as a processor of a data gathering device.
It is interpreted that the photographing unit and electrocardiogram sensor/electrodes are used to obtain the electrocardiogram image. This is recited as pre-solution activity to the step of data gathering.
The display unit is recited as extra-solution activity to the diagnostic step.
The photographing unit may be used as additional elements in combination with the elements recited in claim 1.
However, these elements are recited at a high level of generality performing the function of generic data processing such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to simply implement the abstract idea using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(b) and (f).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical
application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the
judicial exception?
The additional elements when considered individually and in combination are not enough to
qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea.
It is interpreted that the photographing unit and electrocardiogram sensor/electrodes are used to obtain the electrocardiogram image. This is recited as pre-solution activity to the step of data gathering.
The display unit is recited as extra-solution activity to the diagnostic step.
The photographing unit may be used as additional elements in combination with the elements recited in claim 1.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, “photographing unit”, “a processor”, “a display unit”, “a user terminal”, “a photographing unit”, and “a database” which are being interpreted as a processor of a data gathering device as recited to perform the steps of:
provide a reported feedback based on the evaluation information, wherein the evaluation information comprises one or more of first diagnostic information including an electrocardiogram image and a result of evaluation of a heart rhythm of the target patient;
wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information.
selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline;
amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer
components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. These additional elements are well‐understood, routine (For example Lyman et al. US Pub.: US 20200160980 A1, hereinafter Lyman) teaches a data gathering device with a processor and memory, and conventional limitations that amount to mere instructions or elements to implement the abstract idea. In addition, the end result of the system/method, the essence of the whole, is a patent-ineligible concept. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Lyman et al. US Pub.:
US 20200160980 A1, hereinafter Lyman in view of Devam et al. US Pub.: US 20190206134 A1, hereinafter Devam in view of Smith et al. US Pub.: US 20040243015 A1, hereinafter Smith.
Regarding claim 1, Lyman teaches a user terminal (4002), comprising photographing unit (4004)
and a processor (4005) configured to evaluate a patient based on an electrocardiogram image, wherein the user terminal (4002) is configured to: acquire a source electrocardiogram image of a target patient (fig. 12A; paragraph 253-259); The user terminal 4002 uses the image capture device 4012 to acquire a source electrocardiogram image.
Adjusting scale of the entire image by a factor necessary to adjust the size of the scale marker in the captured image to a known baseline size (paragraph 345).
transmit a request including the source electrocardiogram image to a server (150) (fig. 12A; paragraph 253-259); A communication request between the electrocardiogram image capture device 4012 and terminal 4002 is done by the network server 150.
receive evaluation information of the target patient from the server (150) (fig. 12A; paragraph 253-259); Diagnosis data 440 and image data 410 may be utilized and stored in the ECG database 4342. This is received evaluation information of a patient.
and provide a reported feedback based on the evaluation information, wherein the evaluation information comprises one or more of first diagnostic information including an electrocardiogram image and a result of evaluation of a heart rhythm of the target patient (fig. 12A; paragraph 268, 299); The client device 120 includes health monitoring capabilities that can measure heart rate, hearth rhythm, and/or other health data. Captured image of ECG data may also be displayed on the client device 120. These are diagnostic data, which equates to feedback of evaluation information.
However, Lyman does not explicitly teach selecting a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline; wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information.
Devam teaches a system for rendering images and further teaches a number of reference points (N) are selected, either at predefined coordinates or by some other means of selection, which can be used to determine a frame guideline in a photographed image, and adjusting a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline (paragraph 348).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adjusting scale of Lyman to add the selection of reference points from Devam for the benefit of eliminating non-essential photographic information while maintaining a clear ECG image.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the reported feedback comprises one or more of a first region displaying the electrocardiogram image and a second region displaying the first diagnostic information (fig. 9; paragraph 143).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Lyman to add multiple display regions from Smith for the benefit of providing a flexible ranged of processed data without switching in between windows.
Regarding claim 2, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches further comprising: a display unit (270), wherein the configuration of providing the reported feedback comprises displaying a reporting screen (4075) using the display unit (270) (fig. 12A; paragraph 54-55, 254-257, 272, 288, and 199)
Regarding claim 3, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the evaluation information further comprises second diagnostic information including an evaluation value of the target patient for an item in a category different from a heart rhythm category as a result of evaluation in a different aspect from the heart rhythm of the target patient (fig. 12A; paragraph 268, 299). The client device 120 includes health monitoring capabilities that can measure heart rate, hearth rhythm, and/or other health data.
However, Lyman in view of Devam does not teach wherein the reporting screen further comprises a third region that displays one or more of the first diagnostic information and second diagnostic information in a graph as applied.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor, further teaches wherein the reporting screen further comprises a third region that displays one or more of the first diagnostic information and second diagnostic information in a graph (fig. 9; paragraph 143). Figure 9 shows 5 different graphs at 5 different regions of the display.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Lyman in view of Devam to add multiple display regions from Smith for the benefit of providing a flexible ranged of processed data without switching in between windows.
Regarding claim 4, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Smith further teaches wherein in the third region, an x-axis of the graph represents at least some of evaluated items and a y-axis represents an evaluation value of the target patient for the corresponding item, and wherein an evaluation value for each item is expressed as a pointer (fig. 9; paragraph 143). Figure 9 shows 5 different graphs at 5 different regions of the display. The axis are labeled with evaluated items and values. Pointer are also shown indicating the cardiac intervals.
Regarding claim 5, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches a reporting screen (4075) (fig. 12A; paragraph 54-55, 254-257, 272, 288, and 199).
However, Lyman in view of Devam does not explicitly teach teaches wherein the evaluation information further comprises distribution information on an evaluation value for an item, and wherein the reporting screen is further configured such that the distribution information on the evaluation value for the item is expressed as a sub-region on the third region in which a pointer of the evaluation value is positioned therein.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the evaluation information further comprises distribution information on an evaluation value for an item, and wherein the reporting screen is further configured such that the distribution information on the evaluation value for the item is expressed as a sub-region on the third region in which a pointer of the evaluation value is positioned therein (fig. 9; paragraph 143). Figure 9 shows 5 different graphs at 5 different regions of the display. Each region is expressed as a sub region on the display.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Lyman in view of Devam to add multiple display regions from Smith for the benefit of providing a flexible ranged of processed data without switching in between windows.
Regarding claim 6, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Smith further teaches wherein the sub-region has a length of a shape according to a confidence interval of distribution of each evaluation value (fig. 9; paragraph 143). Figure 9 shows 5 different graphs at 5 different regions of the display. Each region is expressed as a sub-region on the display. The confidence interval of each graph is distributed appropriate to the length of the shape of the graph.
Regarding claim 7, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the first diagnostic information is calculated by selecting a normal rhythm, any one of a first group of arrhythmia types, or any one of a second group of arrhythmia types, and wherein when the heart rhythm of the target patient in the first diagnostic information is the second group of arrhythmia types, the user terminal (4002) is configured to provide the reported feedback including a result of evaluation consisting only of the electrocardiogram image and the second diagnostic information (fig. 12A; paragraph 268-269, 299); The client device 120 includes health monitoring capabilities that can measure heart rate, hearth rhythm, and/or other health data. Captured image of ECG data may also be displayed on the client device 120. These are diagnostic data, which equates to feedback of evaluation information. Data may indicate any abnormal type of rhythm or other abnormal features determined to be present in the ECG. This indication may equate to a multitude of arrhythmia types.
Regarding claim 8, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the first group of arrhythmia types comprises one or more of atrial flutter, PSVT, atrial tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and a pacemaker, and wherein the second group of arrhythmia types comprises some or all of remaining arrhythmias that do not belong to the first group among an entire plurality of pre-specified arrhythmia types (fig. 12A; paragraph 268-269, 299); The client device 120 includes health monitoring capabilities that can measure heart rate, hearth rhythm, and/or other health data. Captured image of ECG data may also be displayed on the client device 120. These are diagnostic data, which equates to feedback of evaluation information. Data may indicate any abnormal type of rhythm or other abnormal features determined to be present in the ECG. This indication may equate to a multitude of arrhythmia types.
Regarding claim 9, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches further comprising: a photographing unit (4012), wherein the user terminal (4002) is further configured to: select a plurality of reference points for determining a frame guideline in a photographed image; and adjust a size of an electrocardiogram signal region in the photographed image to fit the determined frame guideline, in order to acquire the source electrocardiogram image (fig. 12A; paragraph 253-259, 275, 299-300,and 343). User terminal 4002 uses the image capture device 4012 to acquire a source electrocardiogram image. A Scale marker 4092 may be used to adjust the size of the captured ECG image.
Regarding claim 10, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the determined frame guideline comprises an electrocardiogram signal region, and wherein at least some of the selected plurality of reference points are positioned inside the frame guideline (fig. 12A; paragraph 253-259, 275, 299-300, and 343). User terminal 4002 uses the image capture device 4012 to acquire a source electrocardiogram image. A Scale marker 4092 may be used to adjust the size of the captured ECG image. The marker itself provides a reference point to determine an adjusted size or shape.
Regarding claim 11, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the user terminal (4002) is further configured to remove a region displaying personal information of a patient to anonymize the source electrocardiogram image (fig. 13D-E; paragraph 289-290). Only diagnostic data is present in the display region and no personal information of the patient is disclosed.
Regarding claim 12, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the user terminal (4002) provides a result of evaluation to an expert account registered in a database (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125 and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. This is in communication to medical database 342.
Regarding claim 13, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein feedback from the expert account on the result of the evaluation is provided to the user terminal (4002) (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125 and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The user terminal 4002 is in communication to database 342.
Regarding claim 14, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the result of the evaluation provided to the expert account is provided in a manner including at least one of a text message, an email, or a push notification (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125, 286,and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The diagnosis data is sent transmitted by utilizing the same messaging service to the same email address, phone number.
Regarding claim 15, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the feedback from the expert account provided to the user terminal (4002) is in the form of at least one of an image, a voice, or a text (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125, 286,and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The diagnosis data is sent transmitted by utilizing the same messaging service to the same email address, phone number. Texts and images are sent.
Regarding claim 16, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the user terminal (4002) provides a result of evaluation to a medical professional or hospital account registered in a database (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125 and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. This is in communication to medical database 342.
Regarding claim 17, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the result of the evaluation provided to the medical professional or hospital account is provided in a manner including at least one of a text message, an email, or a push notification (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125, 286, and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The diagnosis data is sent transmitted by utilizing the same messaging service to the same email address, phone number.
Regarding claim 18, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the user terminal (4002) further provides the medical professional or hospital account registered in the database with a list of preparations based on the result of the evaluation (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125, 289, and 307). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. Recommendation and prescriptions are given based on results.
Regarding claim 19, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein feedback from the medical professional or hospital account on the result of the evaluation is received and provided to the user terminal (4002) (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125 and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The user terminal 4002 is in communication to database 342.
Regarding claim 20, Lyman in view of Devam in view of Smith teaches the claimed invention and
Lyman further teaches wherein the feedback from the medical professional or hospital account provided to the user terminal (4002) is in the form of at least one of an image, a voice, or a text (fig. 12A; paragraph 117-125, 286, and 289). The ECG image and diagnostic data is provided to a client device 120 of an expert user. The diagnosis data is sent transmitted by utilizing the same messaging service to the same email address, phone number. Texts and images are sent.
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 THIEN J TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/T.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
