DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action in response to US Patent Application No. 18/383,914, filed 26 October, 2023, with no claim to prior benefit. Claims 1-13 are pending and have been fully considered.
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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because the claim language includes grammatical abnormalities that should be addressed to improve the clarity of the claims (although the scope of the claims as filed is definite). It is suggested claim 1 be adjusted as follows:
1. (Proposed Amendment) A manufacturing method for a light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure, comprising the following steps:
step S1: providing a light-transmitting substrate having a surface;
step S2: forming a nanoparticle layer having a plurality of metallic nanoparticles on the surface;
step S3: heating the light-transmitting substrate to a softening temperature and continuing the heating for a heating time sufficient for allowing the light-transmitting substrate to enter a softened status, so that the metallic nanoparticles permeate the light-transmitting substrate; and
step S4: cooling the light-transmitting substrate doped with the metallic nanoparticles to a room temperature so that
Alternative adjustments which improve the grammatical clarity and flow of the claim at the positions indicated above may be appropriate. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1&2) as anticipated by Natan et al. (US 2001/0029752 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Natan teaches methods for the preparation of metal nanoparticle and glass composites, wherein the nanoparticles are imbedded in a glass surface (abstract). The method of Natan comprises:
[Step S1] providing a light-transmitting substrate having a surface (BK7 glass slide—[0014]; the glass may be of any type, with other suitable glasses including SF11 glass slides, and glass coverslips—[0013]);
[Step S2] forming a nanoparticle layer having a plurality of metallic nanoparticles on the surface (slides were immersed in a solution of 12 nm colloidal Au particles for 60 minutes—[0014]; slides were dried and placed colloid side up in a furnace on mica sheets—[0015]; monolayer of colloidal metal nanoparticles attached to glass surface—[0013]),
[Step S3] heating the light-transmitting substrate to a softening temperature and keep heating for a heating time allowing the light-transmitting substrate to enter a softened status, so that the metallic nanoparticles permeate the light-transmitting substrate; and (slides were heated for various amounts of time at either the softening point or the transformation temperature of the glass—[0015]; formation of aggregates of particles as they sink into the glass—[0016]; particles sink into the glass surface—[0021]; metal nanoparticles are immobilized in a glass matrix by thermally annealing a monolayer of colloidal metal nanoparticles that are attached to a glass surface—[0013]; the nanoparticles of Natan ‘sinking’ into the glass matrix constitutes the nanoparticles permeating the substrate).
[Step S4]: cooling the light-transmitting substrate doped with the metallic nanoparticles to a room temperature for the metallic nanoparticles to form a doped structure in the light-transmitting substrate (claims 1 and 11: cooling the glass surface, whereby a composite of glass and colloidal metal nanoparticles is created; cooling—[0026]).
With respect to the cooling step of Natan, it is noted that Natan does not indicate that the doped substate is stored at an elevated or refrigerated temperature and Natan does indicate the heating step is for a finite number of minutes. Thus, it is evident to a person having ordinary skill in the art that Natan fairly implies that the structure will necessarily cool back down to an ambient room temperature after the heating.
As the steps of Natan outlined above are indistinguishable from the claimed steps, the method of Natan necessarily yields a light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure consistent with claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 1, and further teaches the light-transmitting substrate is formed of an insulating material (glass of any type, such as SF11 glass slides, BK7 microscope slides, and glass coverslips—[0013]; glass is an insulating material, which is supported by the instant specification at page 8, lines 6-9).
Regarding claim 3, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 2, and further teaches the light-transmitting substrate is formed of glass (glass of any type, such as SF11 glass slides, BK7 microscope slides, and glass coverslips—[0013]).
Regarding claim 4, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 3, and further teaches the metallic nanoparticles are nanometer-sized metal materials (Many of the examples and embodiments herein describe the use of colloidal Au nanoparticles, but it is to be understood that any other metal is also contemplated…For example, metals include but are not limited to Ag, Cu, Al, or alloys comprised of two or more of Au, Al, Ag, and Cu—[0013]; 12 nm Au particles—[0014]).
Regarding claim 5, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 3, and further teaches the softening temperature is a softening point temperature of the glass (the slides were heated for various amount of time at the softening point temperature of the glass…for BK7 glass, this is 557°C—[0015]).
Regarding claim 10, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 1. Claim 10 further states that the metallic nanoparticles form a grain boundary themselves or with molecules of ambient substances, and the metallic nanoparticles are combined with the grain boundary to form the doped structure. The limitations of claim 10 do not clearly set forth an active step which further limits the method of claim 1, and claim 10 instead appears to describe a result of the method of claim 1 and/or defines structures formed by the method of claim 1. Since Natan teaches a method consistent with claim 1, it is presumed that the metallic nanoparticles of the doped structure of Natan form a grain boundary themselves or with molecules of ambient substances, and the metallic nanoparticles are combined with the grain boundary to form the doped structure. See MPEP 2112 regarding rejections based on inherency.
Claims 1-2 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1&2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2017/0260347 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a method for producing a nanocomposite film, the method comprising generating a bilayer film including a first layer of nanoparticles and a second layer of a material, and annealing (claim 1). The method of Lee includes embodiments wherein the nanoparticles are oxide nanoparticles or metal nanoparticles (claim 15; oxide nanoparticles, e.g. SIO2, TiO2, Al2O3, or metal nanoparticles, e.g., gold, silver—[0060]) and the second layer material is an amorphous material such as polystyrene, polymethylmethacrylate, polysulfone, polyetherimide, polyvinyl chloride, or polycarbonate (claim 12; [0063]), with a particular embodiment requiring a first layer of oxide nanoparticles and a second layer of polystyrene material ([0067]) wherein the annealing comprises heating the film above the glass transition temperature of polystyrene (claim 16; [0071], [0074]).
See Figs. 5-6 of Lee below, showing the process (100) of providing a bilayer comprising titanium dioxide nanoparticles (510) arranged on a surface of a polystyrene layer (520) and annealing by heating ([0089]-[0091]).
PNG
media_image1.png
312
408
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
362
378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus, Lee teaches a method comprising steps of:
[Step S1]: providing a light-transmitting substrate having a surface (e.g., polystyrene layer 520 defines a substrate having a surface—see Figs. 5-6, [0089];
[Step S2]: forming a nanoparticle layer (510) having a plurality of metallic nanoparticles on the surface (layer of titanium dioxide nanoparticles 510 provided on surface of polystyrene layer 520—see Figs. 5-6, [0089]—thus implying a step of forming said layer);
[Step S3]: heating the light-transmitting substrate to a softening temperature and keep heating for a heating time allowing the light-transmitting substrate to enter a softened status, so that the metallic nanoparticles permeate the light-transmitting substrate (bilayer structure is annealed at a temperature above the glass transition temperature of polystyrene, so that the polystyrene at the heightened temperature infiltrates the voids 515 between nanoparticles 510—[0089]-[0090]; viewing Figs. 5-6, the infiltration of the softened polystyrene into the nanoparticle layer can also fairly be described as the nanoparticles falling or permeating into the softened polystyrene); and
[Step S4]: cooling the light-transmitting substrate doped with the metallic nanoparticles to a room temperature for the metallic nanoparticles to form a doped structure in the light-transmitting substrate (Reducing the temperature to below the glass transition temperature of polystyrene causes the infiltrated polystyrene polymer to solidify, yielding a polymer nanocomposite film of polystyrene and titanium dioxide—[0090]; a related embodiment cools to room temperature—[0082]—and it is otherwise fairly implied that the film is used and stored at ambient conditions, such that the film necessarily will cool to an ambient room temperature).
As the steps of Lee outlined above are indistinguishable from the claimed steps, it is presumed that they result in the forming of a light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure.
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches the manufacturing method of claim 1. Lee further teaches that the light-transmitting substrate is formed of an insulating material (polystyrene 520—[0089]; the instant specification at page 8, lines 6-8 and 11-12 recognizes polystyrene as a suitable light-transmitting and insulating material for the claimed substrate).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches the manufacturing method of claim 2, and further teaches the light-transmitting substrate is formed of an amorphous polymer (amorphous polystyrene—[0063], [0071], claim 12).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches the manufacturing method of claim 7, and further teaches the metallic nanoparticles are nanometer-sized metal oxide materials (titanium dioxide nanoparticles 510—[0089]; titanium dioxide is a metal oxide, and a nanoparticle is definitionally sized at the nanometer scale).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Natan et al. (US 2001/0029752 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Natan discloses the manufacturing method of claim 3. Natan indicates that various heating times may be utilized in the method (the slides were heated for various amounts of time at either the softening point or the transformation temperature of the glass—[0015]), although the only exemplary heating time disclosed by Natan is thirty minutes (thirty minutes—[0006], [0009], [0012], [0017], [0022], and [0026]). Thus, Natan does not particularly teach the heating time ranges from 3 to 20 minutes.
However, as per MPEP 2144.05(II.)(A.), "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In the instant case, Natan indicates various heating times may be suitable ([0015]), and Natan indicates that adjusting the annealing conditions can allow for tuning of the structure’s optical properties for a desired purpose ([0025]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Natan such that the heating period lasts for a time within the claimed range of 3 to 20 minutes by way of routine optimization of the annealing conditions for the benefit of achieving desired optical properties (see Natan at [0025]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2017/0260347 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches the manufacturing method of claim 7. Lee teaches that the softening temperature is above a glass transition temperature (Tg) of the amorphous polymer (bilayer structure annealed at a temperature above the glass transition temperature of polystyrene—[0090]—e.g., 130 °C—[0091]; Tg of polystyrene with an average molecular weight of 8000 g/mol is 87°C—[0092]).
Lee does not particularly indicate that the softening temperature is also less than a viscous flow temperature (Tf) of the amorphous polymer.
However, Lee recognized that the amorphous polymer has a lower viscosity at higher temperatures, which affects the speed of a capillary affect that embeds the nanoparticles within the amorphous polymer (As the annealing temperature is increased above Tg, the CaRI of the polystyrene is accelerated significantly. The plotted curves indicate that the behavior of the liquid PS is consistent with the behavior of common liquids undergoing capillary rise into porous media, such as the TiO2 layer. At the highest temperature, 130° C., the height of the composite polystyrene/TiO.sub.2 layer increases the fastest over time, indicating a faster capillary rise at higher temperatures above Tg. At the lower temperatures, 125° C. and 120° C., the capillary rise action still occurs, but at successively slower rates—[0094]). Also, it is noted that Lee contemplates different types of amorphous polymer materials ([0063]). Additionally, the range of “above the glass transition temperature” ([0071]) disclosed by Lee overlaps with the claimed range of between a glass transition temperature and a viscous flow temperature (Tf) of the amorphous polymer.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to select a temperature within the overlapping portion of the claimed and prior art range (i.e., a temperature between a glass transition temperature and a viscous flow temperature of the amorphous polymer) for the benefit of controlling the extent of the imbedding of the nanoparticles in the amorphous polymer (e.g., a temperature only just above the glass transition temperature would slow the imbedding of the nanoparticles due to the higher polymer viscosity at said temperature [relative to lower viscosities at higher temperatures]—see Lee at [0063]). Additionally, for materials with viscous flow temperatures that are significantly higher than their glass transition temperature, heating to a temperature between the glass transition temperature and viscous flow temperature can advantageously reduce energy expenditure (i.e., by avoiding excessive heating above the viscous flow temperature) while remaining sufficient to facilitate the imbedding of the nanoparticles.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Natan et al. (US 2001/0029752 A1) in view of Tsung (US 2022/0152252 A1).
As an initial note, it is acknowledged that the reference Tsung (US 2022/0152252 A1) has a common inventor with the instant application. Nonetheless, the stated reference cannot be exempted as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) because it was published (19 May, 2022) more than one year prior to the effective filing date (26 October, 2023) of the instant application. Therefore, even if the applicant were to demonstrate that an exemption under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2) applies, the reference would remain eligible prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Regarding claim 11, Natan teaches the light triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure generated by the method of claim 10. Natan does not teach a method of using the structure comprising: [Step S5]: irradiating the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure with a light source, such that the light source causes a surface plasmon polariton to be formed on a surface of the metallic nanoparticles of the doped structure, and a Tamm plasmon polariton is formed at the grain boundary of the doped structure, whereby the surface plasmon polariton and the Tamm plasmon polariton resonate with each other to form an optical Tamm state; and [Step S6]: performing an interactive oscillation between the optical Tamm state and the ambient substances of the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure to form a cleaning substance, which spreads outward from a periphery of the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure to remove a pollutant around the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure.
However, Tsung, in the analogous art of inhibiting bacteria with surface plasmon wave effects (abstract), teaches an embodiment of a bacteriostatic film (Fig. 7) comprising a particle suspension layer (11), the particle suspension layer formed by coating nanoparticles (24) onto the surface of a substrate material layer (10) to form a particle stacked film layer (21) and subjecting the structure to high heat or other conditions so that the nanoparticle (24) infiltrate or diffuse into the substrate material layer 10 ([0041]). Tsung further indicates that the substrate material layer (10) is a light-transmitting material ([0026]), and from related embodiments it is evident that the suspension layer (11) of Tseung is configured to generate localized surface plasmon resonance ([0025]) and the stacked film layer (21) generates surface plasmon resonances, the layers together generating a composite surface plasmon wave ([0032]). Tsung further teaches exciting the bacteriostatic film by irradiating the bacteriostatic film with visible light, which causes the resonance of and multiple different types of surface plasmon waves imbedded in the structure, thus yielding a composite surface plasmon wave ([0034]). The composite surface plasmon wave is capable of ionizing humidity to form hydroxide ions which have a bactericidal effect ([0034]). Tseung further discusses how the excitation mechanism includes generating electron oscillations ([0034]).
From the above, it is evident that the bacteriostatic film (Fig. 7) of Tsung corresponds to the structure (glass with at least partially embedded nanoparticles) formed by the method of Natan (see rejection of claims 1 and 10 above). To the extent that there may be any differences between the bacteriostatic film (Fig. 7) of Tsung and the structure of Natan, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to adapt the technique of Natan (which comprises depositing nanoparticles on a glass substrate surface and heating the glass to a softening temperature in order to imbed nanoparticles within the glass—see Natan at, e.g., claim 1, and the rejection of instant claim 1 above) to form the bacteriostatic film of Tsung (Fig. 7) for the benefit of driving nanoparticles to infiltrate into the substrate material (see Tsung at [0041] discussing how a nanoparticle layer 21 is coated on a surface of a substrate material 10 and the nanoparticles 24 are made to infiltrate or diffuse into the substrate material 10; the method of Natan is a known method for driving nanoparticles to infiltrate into a substrate, consider Natan at [0016], [0021], and [0026] discussing how particles sink into the surface of the glass as a result of the method of Natan). That is, it would be obvious to improve the known device of Tsung (bacteriostatic film of Fig. 7) by forming the device of Tsung using the known technique of Natan (coating a substate with nanoparticles and heating to a softening temperature—see. e.g., claim 1 of Natan, and the rejection of instant claim 1 above) for the benefit of enabling the fine tuning of the optical properties of the device (Natan at [0025] indicates that by selection of annealing conditions and other properties such as nanoparticle size and number, optical properties can be varied or tuned for a particular purpose); see MPEP 2143(D.) regarding the obviousness of applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable results.
Furthermore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to irradiate the structure of Natan (or the structure of the combination of Natan and Tsung) with visible light for the benefit of generating bactericidal ions (see Tsung at [0064] discussing how visible light interacting with the bacteriostatic film leads to the formation of bactericidal hydroxide ions; also see the above paragraph discussing how the structure of Natan is consistent with the bacteriostatic film of Fig. 7 of Tsung, and how it would otherwise be obvious to form the structure of Fig. 7 of Tsung using the process of Natan).
Thus modified, the combination of Natan and Tsung teaches irradiating the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure of claim 10 with a light source. As best understood, the further language of claim 11 refers to effects resulting from the irradiation of the structure of claim 10 with the light source, and claim 11 does not clearly set forth any further active steps for performing the claimed cleaning method. Accordingly, the irradiation of the structure of Natan (or the structure of the combination of Natan and Tsung) with visible light as set forth above is presumed to result in: a surface plasmon polariton being formed on a surface of the metallic nanoparticles of the doped structure, and a Tamm plasmon polariton being formed at the grain boundary of the doped structure, whereby the surface plasmon polariton and the Tamm plasmon polariton resonate with each other to form an optical Tamm state; and the prior art (combination of Natan and Tsung) cleaning method is further presumed to encompasses a step S6 of performing an interactive oscillation between the optical Tamm state and the ambient substances of the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure to form a cleaning substance, which spreads outward from a periphery of the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure to remove a pollutant around the light-triggered light-transmitting cleaning structure.
This finding is supported by Tseung describing the bacteriostatic film operating by a bactericidal mechanism which corresponds to the language of instant claim 11, said bactericidal mechanism including emitting visible light to generate electron oscillations which are enhanced by different types of plasmon resonance effect and which lead to the ionization of substances in air, especially water molecules ([0034], [0035]), which can propagate to fill an entire space or area ([0036]); ionized water vapor and oxygen inhibit the growth of bacteria and decompose dirt ([0034], [0035]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Natan and Tsung teaches the cleaning method of claim 11, and Tsung further teaches that wavelength of the light source is within the claimed range of 100 to 1000 nanometers (Tseung: visible light—[0034]; visible light lays entirely within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Natan and Tsung teaches the cleaning method of claim 11. Natan teaches that the light-transmitting substrate is formed of glass (glass of any type, such as SF11 glass slides, BK7 microscope slides, and glass coverslips—[0013]). Furthermore, As discussed with respect to claim 11 above, it would be obvious to irradiate the structure of Natan with visible light as suggested by Tsung ([0034]; see rejection of claim 11 above), wherein visible light overlaps with the claimed range of 320 to 570 nanometers (visible light is typically defined as having a wavelength ranging from about 380 to 700 nanometers). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, when irradiating the structure of Natan (or the structure of the combination of Natan and Tsung) with visible light (see rejection of claim 11 above), to select a wavelength of irradiating light within the overlapping portion (380-570 nm) of the claimed range (320-570 nm) and prior art range (380-700 nm) for the benefit of providing a wavelength of light suitable for exciting the structure to generate bactericidal ionized species (consider Tsung at [0034]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Malak (US 2005/0164169 A1) teaches methods and applications of surface plasmon resonance-enhanced photocatalytic or antimicrobial materials ([0029]), especially with respect to the use of structures comprising nanoparticles embedded into a material and configured to generate enhanced surface plasmon interactions which lead to the decomposition of biological and chemical substances ([0050]; nanoparticle embedded in material is irradiated with an exciting source causing surface plasmon resonance within the embedded nanoparticle structure which interacts with nearby biological substances—claim 1; biological substances may include bacteria, microbe, virus, or pathogen—claim 2; embedded nanoparticle is metal or metal oxide—claim 4; material is a dielectric, glass or polymer—claim 12).
Tsung et al. (US 2015/0099321 A1) teaches methods for fabricating microstructures to generate surface plasmon waves (abstract), including an embodiment wherein a layer of metallic nanoparticles (21) is arranged over a surface of a substrate (10) and the substrate (10) is activated via heating the substrate to a temperature of 500-600 °C so that metallic nanoparticles 21 enter the substrate (10) to form a suspension layer (32) ([0040], Fig. 3B).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/MICHAEL A MARCHESCHI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1799