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 .
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, 11, 12, 15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 (lines 6-7), 12 (lines 7-8), 15 (line 9) and 21 (line 9), the phrase “from a first end to a second of the insert” is indefinite as it is unclear what “”to a second of the insert” means. It appears Applicant is intending to claim “to a second end of the insert”. In each of these claims, the phrase should be amended to read: “from a first end to a second end of the insert”.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 currently depends from cancelled claim 10, which is indefinite. It appears that claim 11 should depend from claim 1, which includes the language of now cancelled original claim 10. For the rejection, claim 11 will be interpreted as depending from claim 1, but appropriate correction is necessary.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 11-16 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Flanigan (5,705,777).
With respect to claim 1, Flanigan teaches a flow control insert (Figures 1-2, defined by #14/15/20 or #14/15/20/22) configured for installation into a muffler housing (12) receiving a flow of a fluid therethrough, the muffler housing (12) having an expansion chamber (defined by space receiving packing #24) formed therein with the expansion chamber defined by a housing inner circumferential surface (inner surface of housing #12) of the muffler housing (12), the flow control insert (14/15/20 or 14/15/20/22) comprising: a tubular insert circumferential wall (defined by circumferential wall 14/15/20 or 14/15/20/22) having an insert inner circumferential surface defining a flow pathway through the flow control insert from a first end to a second of the insert circumferential wall with respect to an axial direction thereof (clearly seen, note ends #14 and 15), the flow pathway extending axially across at least a portion of the expansion chamber of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert is installed therein, wherein an inner diameter of the insert inner circumferential surface (14/15/20 or 14/15/20/22) is less than an inner diameter of the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (defined by inner circumference of housing #12), wherein the insert inner circumferential surface delimits radially outward expansion of the fluid when the fluid is passing through the flow pathway along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (in the same way as Applicant’s as described in the Specification, [0047]), wherein at least a section of the insert circumferential wall disposed along the expansion chamber is porous (defined by perforations #20-1, Col. 2, Lines 59-63) to provide acoustic wave communication between the flow pathway (pathway along #14/20/15) and the housing (12) inner circumferential surface along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber, and wherein the insert (14/20/15 or 14/20/22/15) inner circumferential surface defines a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of one of couplings #14/15, adjacent inlet of housing #12) within the flow pathway adjacent an inlet into the expansion chamber (space accommodating packing #24) of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (14/20/15) is installed therein.
With respect to claim 4, Flanigan teaches wherein a porosity (defined by perforations #20-1) of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is selected to prevent the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall from operating as a Helmholtz resonator. Note that muffler #10 is an absorptive type muffler, not a resonance muffler and does not function as a Helmholtz resonator.
With respect to claim 5, Flanigan teaches wherein the at least a section (22) of the insert circumferential wall (of pipe #20/22) is formed by a screen (could be #20 or #22) having a plurality of pores (if #22, inherent to Nomex cloth – Col. 2, Line 65-Col. 3, Line 6; or perforations #20-1) formed as through-holes of the insert circumferential wall.
With respect to claim 11, Flanigan teaches wherein the insert (14/20/15) inner circumferential surface defines a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of other of couplings #14/15, adjacent outlet of housing #12) within the flow pathway adjacent an outlet from the expansion chamber (space accommodating packing #24) of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (14/20/15) is installed therein.
With respect to claim 12, Flanigan teaches a flow control insert (Figures 1-2, defined by #20 or #14/15/20) configured for installation into a muffler housing (12) receiving a flow of a fluid therethrough, the muffler housing (12) having an expansion chamber (defined by space receiving packing #24) formed therein with the expansion chamber defined by a housing inner circumferential surface (inner surface of housing #12) of the muffler housing (12), the flow control insert (20 or 14/15/20) comprising: a tubular insert circumferential wall (defined by circumferential wall of #20) having an insert inner circumferential surface defining a flow pathway through the flow control insert from a first end to a second of the insert circumferential wall with respect to an axial direction thereof (clearly seen, note respective ends of pipe #20, or ends #14 and 15, when insert includes components #14/15/20), the flow pathway extending axially across at least a portion of the expansion chamber of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert is installed therein, a first retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent one end of pipe #20) adjacent the first end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a first end), wherein an inner diameter of the insert inner circumferential surface (of pipe #20) is less than an inner diameter of the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (defined by inner circumference of housing #12), wherein the insert inner circumferential surface delimits radially outward expansion of the fluid when the fluid is passing through the flow pathway along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (in the same way as Applicant’s as described in the Specification, [0047]), wherein at least a section of the insert circumferential wall disposed along the expansion chamber is porous (defined by perforations #20-1, Col. 2, Lines 59-63) to provide acoustic wave communication between the flow pathway (pathway along #14/20/15) and the housing (12) inner circumferential surface along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber, and a second retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent other end of pipe #20) adjacent the second end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a second end), wherein each of the first retaining projection and the second retaining projection engage the housing inner circumferential surface of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (20) is installed within the muffler housing (12).
With respect to claim 13, Flanigan teaches wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall (could be any portion of pipe #20 inner circumferential wall) is spaced axially from an inlet (defined by unspecified inlet end of housing #12 coupled to one of #14/15) into the expansion chamber of the muffler housing when the flow control insert (20) is disposed within the muffler housing.
With respect to claim 14, Flanigan teaches wherein an inner diameter of the insert inner circumferential surface (inner surface of pipe #20) is 90-125% of an inner diameter of an inlet (defined by opening section of housing accommodating whichever of couplings #14 or 15 is an inlet) into the expansion chamber of the muffler housing (12).
With respect to claim 15, Flanigan teaches a refrigerant muffler (Figures 1-2, #10) configured to convey a flow of refrigerant therethrough (see title/abstract), the refrigerant muffler (10) comprising: a muffler housing (12/14/15) having a housing inner circumferential surface defining an expansion chamber (defined by space receiving packing #24), an inlet (inlet defined by one of #14/15) into the expansion chamber, and an outlet (inlet defined by other of #14/15) from the expansion chamber; and a flow control insert (20) disposed within the muffler housing (12/14/15), the flow control insert including a tubular insert circumferential wall (defined by circumferential wall of #20) having an insert inner circumferential surface (defined by inner surface of #20) defining a flow pathway through the flow control insert from a first end (defined by inlet end of #20) to a second (defined by outlet end of #20) of the insert circumferential wall with respect to an axial direction thereof (clearly seen, note respective ends of pipe #20), the flow pathway extending axially across at least a portion of the expansion chamber of the muffler housing (114/15) when the flow control insert is installed therein, a first retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent one end of pipe #20) adjacent the first end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a first end) and a second retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent other end of pipe #20) adjacent the second end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a second end), wherein an inner diameter of the insert inner circumferential surface (of pipe #20) is less than an inner diameter of the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (defined by inner circumference of housing #12/14/15), wherein the insert inner circumferential surface delimits radially outward expansion of the fluid when the fluid is passing through the flow pathway along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (in the same way as Applicant’s as described in the Specification, [0047]) in a direction from the inlet to the outlet of the expansion chamber (clearly seen), and wherein at least a section of the insert circumferential wall disposed along the expansion chamber is porous (defined by perforations #20-1, Col. 2, Lines 59-63) to provide acoustic wave communication between the flow pathway (pathway along #20) and the housing (12/14/15) inner circumferential surface along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber, wherein each of the first retaining projection and the second retaining projection engage (via ridges #30-3) the housing inner circumferential surface of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (20) is installed within the muffler housing (12).
With respect to claim 16, Flanigan teaches wherein the housing (12/14/15) inner circumferential surface further defines an inlet chamber (defined by whichever of #14/15 is an inlet) of the muffler housing having a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of couplings #14/15) formed therein adjacent the inlet to the expansion chamber and an outlet chamber (defined by whichever of #14/15 is an outlet) of the muffler housing having a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of couplings #14/15) formed therein adjacent the outlet from the expansion chamber.
With respect to claim 19, Flanigan teaches wherein a porosity (defined by perforations #20-1) of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall (of pipe #20) is selected to prevent the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall from operating as a Helmholtz resonator. Note that muffler #10 is an absorptive type muffler, not a resonance muffler and does not function as a Helmholtz resonator.
With respect to claim 20, Flanigan teaches wherein a porosity (defined by perforations #20-1) of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall (of pipe #20) is selected to prevent the formation of a recirculation zone of the refrigerant within an annular space disposed radially outwardly of the insert circumferential wall, in the same way as Applicant’s by including of pipe #20 versus a space lacking an inner pipe, as seen in Applicant’s Figure 1 and discussed in the Specification, [0004] and [0048].
With respect to claim 21, Flanigan teaches a refrigerant muffler (Figures 1-2, #10) configured to convey a flow of refrigerant therethrough (see title/abstract), the refrigerant muffler (10) comprising: a muffler housing (12) having a housing inner circumferential surface defining an expansion chamber (defined by space receiving packing #24), an inlet (inlet defined unspecified inlet end of housing #12 coupled to one of #14/15 through one of end caps 12-2/12-3) into the expansion chamber, and an outlet (outlet defined unspecified outlet end of housing #12 coupled to other of #14/15 through other of end caps 12-2/12-3) from the expansion chamber; and a flow control insert (20/14/15) disposed within the muffler housing (12), the flow control insert including a tubular insert circumferential wall (defined by circumferential wall of #14/15/20) having an insert inner circumferential surface (defined by inner surface of #14/15/20) defining a flow pathway through the flow control insert from a first end (defined by inlet end of #14/1520) to a second (defined by outlet end of #14/15/20) of the insert circumferential wall with respect to an axial direction thereof (clearly seen, note respective ends #14/15), the flow pathway extending axially across at least a portion of the expansion chamber of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (14/15/20) is installed therein, wherein an inner diameter of the insert inner circumferential surface (of pipe #14/15/20) is less than an inner diameter of the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (defined by inner circumference of housing #12/14/15), wherein the insert inner circumferential surface delimits radially outward expansion of the refrigerant when the refrigerant is passing through the flow pathway along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber (in the same way as Applicant’s as described in the Specification, [0047]) in a direction from the inlet to the outlet of the expansion chamber (clearly seen), wherein at least a section of the insert circumferential wall disposed along the expansion chamber is porous (defined by perforations #20-1, Col. 2, Lines 59-63) to provide acoustic wave communication between the flow pathway (pathway along #14/20/15) and the housing (12) inner circumferential surface along the at least a portion of the expansion chamber, wherein the insert inner circumferential surface (defined by inner surface of #14/15/20) defines a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of one of couplings #14/15, adjacent inlet of housing #12) within the flow pathway adjacent an inlet into the expansion chamber (space accommodating packing #24) of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (14/20/15) is installed therein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flanigan (5,705,777).
With respect to claims 2 and 17, Flanigan is relied upon for the reasons and disclosures set forth above. Flannigan further teaches wherein a porosity of the at least a section (20) of the insert circumferential wall (14/15/20 or 20) is approximately 40% when the corresponding pores (20-1) are provided as through-holes of the insert circumferential wall (14/15/20 or 20), and wherein the at least a section (20) of the insert circumferential wall (14/15/20 or 20) has an obvious, but unspecified radial thickness (Col. 2, Lines 59-63).
Flannigan fails to teach wherein a porosity of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is between 10-25% when the corresponding pores are provided as through- holes of the insert circumferential wall, and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is 1 mm or less in radial thickness.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein a porosity of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is between 10-25% when the corresponding pores are provided as through- holes of the insert circumferential wall, and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is 1 mm or less in radial thickness, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In this case, Applicant is merely tuning the device by setting a particular porosity and wall thickness, which tuning is obvious and well-known in order to tune the device to a particular desired frequency or sound absorption range.
With respect to claim 6, Flanigan is relied upon for the reasons and disclosures set forth above. Flannigan further teaches wherein the screen (22) is provided as a polymer screen (i.e., Nomex cloth – Col. 2, Line 65-Col. 3, Line 6) of an unspecified construction (i.e., woven/non-woven).
Flanigan fails to explicitly teach wherein the polymer screen is a non-woven polymer screen.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the polymer screen is a non-woven polymer screen, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In this case, it is well known that Nomex fibers can be made into both woven and non-woven fabrics.
Claims 3, 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flanigan (5,705,777) in view of Takei (4,350,223).
With respect to claims 3 and 18, Flanigan is relied upon for the reasons and disclosures set forth above. Flannigan further teaches wherein the pores (20-1) of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall are at least 900 µm in diameter when the corresponding pores are provided as through-holes of the insert circumferential wall, and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall has an obvious, but unspecified radial thickness (Col. 2, Lines 59-63).
Flannigan fails to teach wherein the pores of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall are at least 900 µm in diameter when the corresponding pores are not provided as through-holes of the insert circumferential wall, and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is greater than 1 mm in radial thickness.
Takei teaches wherein it is known to provide a similar muffler with a porous sintered insert circumferential wall (10), wherein the pores of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall are of an obvious, but unspecified diameter when the corresponding pores are not provided as through-holes (due to sintered nature of pipe in the same way as Applicant’s sintered pipe) of the insert circumferential wall (10), and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall has an obvious, but unspecified radial thickness (Col 1, Lines 59-Col. 2, Line 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Flanigan, with the apparatus of Takei so as to further damp vibrations, by providing an insert pipe having a very fine pore structure as such a material exhibits excellent damping characteristics, and any vibration transmitted thereto from an external source will be absorbed (see Takei, Col 2, Lines 7-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the pores of the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall are at least 900 µm in diameter when the corresponding pores are not provided as through-holes of the insert circumferential wall, and wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is greater than 1 mm in radial thickness, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In this case, Applicant is merely tuning the device by setting a particular porosity and wall thickness, which tuning is obvious and well-known in order to tune the device to a particular desired frequency or sound absorption range.
With respect to claim 7, Flanigan is relied upon for the reasons and disclosures set forth above. Flannigan further teaches at least a section (20) of the insert circumferential wall (14/15/20) has a porous structure (defined by perforations #20-1) and formed of an unspecified material.
Flannigan fails to teach wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall is formed from a sintered metal or a sintered polymer.
Takei teaches wherein it is known to provide a similar muffler having a similar insert circumferential wall (10), wherein the at least a section of the insert circumferential wall (10) is formed from a sintered metal (Col 1, Lines 59-Col. 2, Line 19) or a sintered polymer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Flanigan, with the apparatus of Takei so as to further damp vibrations, by providing an insert pipe having a very fine pore structure as such a material exhibits excellent damping characteristics, and any vibration transmitted thereto from an external source will be absorbed (see Takei, Col 2, Lines 7-12).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/9/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner still considers Flannigan and Takei to teach all of the limitations as claimed by Applicant.
Regrading claims 1 and 21, Applicant argues that “FLANIGAN has a venturi passageway formed outside of the housing (more precisely in a coupling 14 joined to an outside of the housing, not on an inner surface within the inlet of the insert (20))”. The Examiner disagrees as the claims do not preclude the Venturi from being formed outside of the housing as argued. The rejection of original claim 10 (now part of claim 1 and rejected in the same way) clearly refer to the insert as being formed of components #14/15/20 of Flannigan, as the rejection states that “Flannigan teaches…wherein the insert (14/20/15 or 14/20/22/15) inner circumferential surface defines a Venturi passageway (note tapered venturi shape of one of couplings #14/15, adjacent inlet of housing #12) within the flow pathway adjacent an inlet into the expansion chamber (space accommodating packing #24) of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (14/20/15) is installed therein.” The claims do not preclude portions of the insert or flow pathway from being located outside of the housing, nor is the Venturi portion required to be within the housing. The Venturi is only required to be within the flow pathway and adjacent an inlet into the expansion chamber of the muffler housing when the flow control insert (14/20/15) is installed therein. Additionally, the flow path itself is not required to be formed entirely within the housing either. Therefore, the rejection is proper.
Regrading claims 12 and 15, Applicant argues that Flannigan does not teach the first and second retaining portions as claimed, and further argues that “the cover 22 of FLANIGAN is a separate part from the insert 20 and does not engage with the housing 12. Accordingly, it does not have a structure that corresponds to the first retaining projection 57 and the second retaining projection 58 of the present invention.” The Examiner disagrees, and notes from the previous and above rejections that “Flanigan teaches…a first retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent one end of pipe #20) adjacent the first end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a first end), and a second retaining projection (could be portion of 22/24/30 adjacent other end of pipe #20) adjacent the second end of the insert circumferential wall (end of #20 at a second end), wherein each of the first retaining projection and the second retaining projection engage the housing inner circumferential surface of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (20) is installed within the muffler housing (12).” It is unclear why Applicant is arguing that cover #22 is a separate part from the insert 20 and does not engage with the housing, as first, it is unclear what Applicant means by cover #22 being separate from the insert #20, as the claims do not require that the first/second retaining portions are integrally formed, or otherwise not “separate” from the component #20, so this argument is unpersuasive. Secondly, element #22 is only part of the first/second retaining portions cited in the rejection. As noted above, the rejection refers to the combination of components #22/24/30 as forming the first and second retaining portions at respective ends of element #20, and portions #30-3 of sleeve #30 clearly “engage the housing inner circumferential surface of the muffler housing (12) when the flow control insert (20) is installed within the muffler housing (12)” as claimed. Therefore, the rejection is proper.
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 JEREMY AUSTIN LUKS whose telephone number is (571)272-2707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:00-5:00).
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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.
/JEREMY A LUKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837