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 1-4, 6-7, 9-10 and 16-20 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the protruding tube structure” in Lines 22-23 and Claim 16 recites the limitation “the protruding tube structure” in Line 17. The term “the protruding tube structure” is being interpreted as the “tube structure” first recited in both of Claims 1 and 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in independent Claims 1 and 16. Appropriate correction and/or clarification 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.
Claims 16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (USPN 11,712,500).
Re Claim 16, Wang teaches a breast pump device (100) (as seen in Wang Fig. 1), configured as an at least in part in-bra wearable device, wherein the breast pump device (Wang Col. 3 Lines 43-52) comprising: a main machine housing (10) (Wang Fig. 12); an electric pump (18) configured to provide a first negative pressure and coupled to the main machine housing (10) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12); a control circuit coupled to the electric pump (18) and configured to control operations of the electric pump (18) (Wang Col. 6 Liens 43-46 - start function mode control button and strength/frequency control buttons to facilitate control of the breast pump); a breast housing (31) configured to accommodate a breast of a user (Wang Col. 4 Lines 19-48); a milk bowl (20) (Wang Col. 3 Lines 59-65); a suction diaphragm (40) detachably coupled between the milk bowl (20) and the main machine housing (10) (Wang Figs. 3-5), and configured to generate a second negative pressure to the breast of the user in response to the first negative pressure (Wang Col. 5 Line 62 to Col. 6 Line 10, Col. 7 Lines 14-25); wherein the suction diaphragm (40) comprises a cap (15) (Wang Figs. 11-12; Col. 5 Line 62 to Col. 6 Line 10) coupled to the suction diaphragm (40), wherein the cap (15) comprises a tube structure (111) protruding outwardly from the suction diaphragm (40) and configured to be plugged into a suction hole (153) of the main machine housing (10) (Wang Fig. 12 showing main machine housing 10 comprising pump 18 upon which tube structure connects) to apply the first negative pressure to the suction diaphragm (40), and the protruding tube structure (111) tightly fits the suction hole (153), wherein the suction hole (153) is provided between the tube structure (111) and the electric pump (18) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12).
Re Claim 19, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 16. Wang teaches wherein the suction hole is in a recessed portion (accommodation cavity of second housing 17) of the main machine housing (10) (Wang Fig. 3), and the tube structure (111) is inserted into the recessed portion of the main machine housing (10) (Wang Fig. 12).
Re Claim 20, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 16. Wang further teaches wherein the cap (36) further comprises: a protrusion portion (Wang Fig. 3 wherein hook-shaped snap structure is an inwardly protruding concave structure that circumscribes airbag 40) comprising at least one of concave structure, formed on an inner surface of the protrusion portion and surrounding an opening of the tube structure (111) (Wang Fig. 12).
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 1-3, 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Wainstein et al. (USPGPub 2022/0047786).
Re Claim 1, Wang teaches a breast pump device (100) (as seen in Wang Fig. 1), configured as an at least in part in-bra wearable device (Wang Col. 3 Lines 43-52), wherein the breast pump device (100) comprising: a main machine housing (10); an electric pump (18) configured to provide a first negative pressure and coupled within the main machine housing (10) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12); a control circuit coupled to the electric pump and configured to control operations of the electric pump (Wang Col. 6 Liens 43-46 - start function mode control button and strength/frequency control buttons to facilitate control of the breast pump); a breast housing (31) configured to accommodate a breast of a user (Wang Col. 4 Lines 19-48); a milk container (20) (Wang Col. 3 Lines 59-65); a tee pipe structure (30) coupled to the breast housing (10) and the milk container (20) (Wang Fig. 5; Col. 3 Line 43 to Col. 4 Line 18); and a suction diaphragm unit (15, 36, 40) coupled between the main machine housing (10) and the tee pipe structure (30) (Wang Figs. 3-5), wherein the suction diaphragm unit (15, 36, 40) comprises: a suction chamber (152); a diaphragm cover (15), and a suction diaphragm (40) detachably attached to the suction chamber (152) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 11-19; Fig. 3); wherein the suction diaphragm unit (15, 36, 40) is configured to generate a second negative pressure to the breast of the user in response to the first negative pressure via the tee pipe structure (30) while preventing liquid or moisture from entering the electric pump (18) (Wang Col. 5 Line 62 to Col. 6 Line 10, Col. 7 Lines 14-25), and the diaphragm cover (15) comprises a tube structure (111) protruding outwardly from the suction diaphragm unit (15, 36, 40) and connected to a suction hole (153) (Wang Fig. 12 showing main machine housing 10 comprising pump 18 upon which tube structure connects) of the main machine housing (10) to transfer the first negative pressure (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12), wherein the suction hole (153) is provided between the tube structure (111) and the electric pump (18), and the protruding tube structure (111) tightly fits the suction hole (153) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12).
Wang fails to teach wherein the breast pump device comprises a shaft, wherein the diaphragm cover is coupled to the suction chamber via the shaft so that the diaphragm cover is rotatably attached to the suction chamber. Wainstein teaches a breast pump device (10) comprising a shaft (68) and a suction chamber (as seen in Wainstein Fig. 5 - chamber comprising diaphragm 28), wherein a diaphragm cover (66) is coupled to the suction chamber via the shaft (68) so that the diaphragm cover (66) is rotatably attached to the suction chamber for securely attaching and detaching the diaphragm cover to the breast pump device (Wainstein ¶ 0012, 0041). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the diaphragm cover of Wang to be coupled to the suction chamber via a shaft so that the diaphragm cover is rotatably attached to the suction chamber as disclosed by Wainstein for securely attaching and detaching the diaphragm cover to the breast pump device (Wainstein ¶ 0012, 0041).
Re Claim 2, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 1. Wang teaches wherein the diaphragm cover (36) is configured to secure the suction diaphragm (40) between the diaphragm cover (36) and the suction chamber (152) (Wang Fig. 3).
Re Claim 3, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 2. Wang teaches wherein the diaphragm cover (36) further comprises: a protrusion portion (Wang Fig. 3 wherein hook-shaped snap structure is an inwardly protruding concave structure that circumscribes airbag 40) comprising at least one of concave structure, formed on an inner surface of the protrusion portion and surrounding an opening of the tube structure (111) (Wang Fig. 12).
Re Claim 9, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 1. Wang further teaches wherein the breast housing (31) comprises: a flange portion (311) coupled to the tee pipe structure (30) and configured to be coupled to a nipple of the breast (Wang Fig. 3; Col. 4 Lines 38-48); and a concave surface on a side of the breast housing (31) opposite to the main machine housing (10) to accommodate the breast (as seen in Wang Fig. 3).
Re Claim 18, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 16. Wang fails to teach a shaft, wherein the cap is attached to the suction diaphragm via the shaft. Wainstein teaches a breast pump device (10) comprising a shaft (68) and a suction diaphragm (28) (Wainstein Fig. 5), wherein a cap (66) is attached to the suction diaphragm (28) via the shaft (68) for securely attaching and detaching the cover to the breast pump device (Wainstein ¶ 0012, 0041; Fig. 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the cap of Wang to comprise a shaft, wherein the cap is attached to the suction diaphragm via the shaft as disclosed by Wainstein for securely attaching and detaching the cover to the breast pump device (Wainstein ¶ 0012, 0041; Fig. 5).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Wainstein et al. (USPGPub 2022/0047786) as applied to Claim 2 above, and further in view of Ochiai (USPGPub 2019/0143014).
Re Claim 4, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 2. Wang fails to teach wherein the suction chamber comprises at least one material selected from Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) plastic, polypropylene, polystyrene, nylon, polycarbonate, or methacrylate. Ochiai teaches a breast pump (Ochiai Fig. 2) comprising a suction chamber (S4) wherein the suction chamber comprises polycarbonate (Ochiai ¶ 0074), and wherein the suction diaphragm (30) comprises at least one material selected from silicone, rubber, resin, or epoxy (Ochiai ¶ 0093-0094). Examiner notes that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration well within the ordinary skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Re Claim 6, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 2. Wang fails to teach wherein a material of the suction chamber is stiffer than that of the suction diaphragm. Ochiai teaches a breast pump (Ochiai Fig. 2) comprising a suction chamber (S4) and a suction diaphragm (30) wherein the suction chamber comprises polycarbonate (Ochiai ¶ 0074) and the suction diaphragm comprises silicone (Ochiai ¶ 0093), wherein polycarbonate is stiffer than silicone. Examiner notes that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration well within the ordinary skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Wainstein et al. (USPGPub 2022/0047786) as applied to Claim 2 above, and further in view of Bryan et al. (USPGPub 2010/0121266).
Re Claim 7, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 2. Wang further teaches the suction diaphragm (40) is configured to fit over a rim (41) of the suction chamber (152) to seal the suction chamber (152) airtight (Wang Col. 7 Lines 14-25). Wang fails to teach wherein the diaphragm cover comprises a buckle detachably attached to the suction chamber. Bryan teaches a breast pump (Bryan Figs. 29-30) comprising a suction diaphragm (355) and a diaphragm cover (325), the diaphragm cover (325) comprising a buckle detachably attached to the suction chamber (365) (as seen in Bryan Fig. 31) for ease of access to the suction diaphragm for cleaning and replacement of parts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the diaphragm cover of Wang to comprise a buckle detachably attached to the suction chamber as disclosed by Bryan for ease of access to the suction diaphragm for cleaning or replacement of parts (as seen in Bryan Fig. 31).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Wainstein et al. (USPGPub 2022/0047786) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Bryan et al. (USPGPub 2010/0121266).
Re Claim 10, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 1. Wang further teaches a duckbill valve (50) coupled to the milk container (20) and configured to guide the milk into the milk container (20) (Wang Fig. 3). However, Wang fails to teach the tee pipe structure comprises: a thread structure coupled to the milk container and configured to fasten the tee pipe structure to the milk container. Bryan further teaches wherein the tee pipe structure (320) comprises: a thread structure (324) coupled to the milk container (322) and configured to fasten the tee pipe structure (320) to the milk container (322) for airtight securement (Bryan ¶ 0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the tee pipe structure of Wang to comprise a thread structure coupled to the milk container and configured to fasten the tee pipe structure to the milk container for airtight securement (Bryan ¶ 0147).
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Wainstein et al. (USPGPub 2022/0047786) as applied to Claim 16 above, and further in view of Bryan et al. (USPGPub 2010/0121266).
Re Claim 17, Wang in view of Wainstein teach all of the limitations of Claim 16. Wang fails to teach wherein the diaphragm cover comprises a buckle configured to fasten the cap to the suction diaphragm. Bryan teaches a breast pump (Bryan Figs. 29-30) comprising a suction diaphragm (355) and a diaphragm cover (325), the diaphragm cover (325) comprising a buckle configured to fasten the cap to the suction diaphragm (as seen in Bryan Fig. 31) for ease of access to the suction diaphragm for cleaning and replacement of parts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the diaphragm cover of Wang to comprise a buckle configured to fasten the cap to the suction diaphragm as disclosed by Bryan for ease of access to the suction diaphragm for cleaning or replacement of parts (as seen in Bryan Fig. 31).
Claims 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (USPN 11,712,500) in view of Larsson (USPN 5,071,403).
Re Claim 11, Wang teaches a breast pump device (100) (as seen in Wang Fig. 1), configured as an at least in part in-bra wearable device (Wang Col. 3 Lines 43-52), wherein the breast pump device (100) comprising: a main machine housing (10); an electric pump (18) configured to provide a first negative pressure and coupled within the main machine housing (10) (Wang Col. 6 Lines 20-37; Fig. 12); a control circuit coupled to the electric pump and configured to control operations of the electric pump (Wang Col. 6 Liens 43-46 - start function mode control button and strength/frequency control buttons to facilitate control of the breast pump); a breast housing (31) configured to accommodate a breast of a user (Wang Col. 4 Lines 19-48); a milk container (20) (Wang Col. 3 Lines 59-65); a suction diaphragm (15, 36, 40) coupled to the milk container (20) and the breast housing (31) (Wang Figs. 3-5) and configured to apply a second negative pressure to the breast of a nursing mother in response to the first negative pressure (Wang Col. 5 Line 62 to Col. 6 Line 10, Col. 7 Lines 14-25).
However, Wang fails to teach a filtering cap coupled between the suction diaphragm and the main machine housing, wherein the filtering cap comprises: a cap body; a first lid detachably coupled between the cap body and the main machine housing; and a structure coupled to the cap body and surrounding a cap hole of the cap body, and the structure is configured to retain liquid or moisture between the cap body and the first lid, wherein the first lid comprises a lid opening, and the lid opening is aligned with a suction hole of the main machine housing and the cap hole of the cap body.
Larsson teaches a breast pump (Larsson Figs. 1-2) comprising a main machine housing (1), a suction diaphragm (60) and a filtering cap (66) coupled between the suction diaphragm (60) and the main machine housing (1), wherein the filtering cap (66) comprises: a cap body (as seen in Larsson Fig. 1A); a first lid (64) detachably coupled between the cap body and the main machine housing (1); and a structure (72, 74) coupled to the cap body and surrounding a cap hole (59) of the cap body, and the structure (72, 74) is configured to retain liquid or moisture between the cap body and the first lid (64) (Larsson Col. 4 Line 62 to Col. 5 Line 21), wherein the first lid (64) comprises a lid opening (78), and the lid opening (78) is aligned with a suction hole (86) of the main machine housing (1) and the cap hole (59) of the cap body (Larsson Fig. 1), the configuration for preventing milk from entering the pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the filtering cap of Wang to comprise a cap body; a first lid detachably coupled between the cap body and the main machine housing; and a structure coupled to the cap body and surrounding a cap hole of the cap body, and the structure is configured to retain liquid or moisture between the cap body and the first lid, wherein the first lid comprises a lid opening, and the lid opening is aligned with a suction hole of the main machine housing and the cap hole of the cap body as disclosed by Larsson the configuration for preventing milk from entering the pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64).
Re Claims 12 and 13, Wang in view of Larsson teach all of the limitations of Claim 11. Wang fails to teach wherein the filtering cap comprises: one or more cap openings on the cap body and configured to block or reduce liquid or moisture from passing through while allowing air to pass through, wherein the one or more cap openings are arranged in one or more arrays; and wherein none of the one or more cap openings is aligned with a suction hole of the main machine housing, and wherein the suction hole is connected to the electric pump. Larsson teaches the filtering cap (66) comprising one or more cap openings (74) on the cap body and configured to block or reduce liquid or moisture from passing through while allowing air to pass through (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64), wherein the one or more cap openings (74) are arranged in one or more arrays (Larsson Fig. 1A); and wherein none of the one or more cap openings is aligned with a suction hole (86) of the main machine housing (1), and wherein the suction hole (86) is connected to an electric pump (58) (Larsson Fig. 1), the configuration for preventing milk from entering the electric pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the filtering cap of Wang in view of Bryan to comprise one or more cap openings configured to block or reduce liquid or moisture from passing through while allowing air to pass through, wherein the one or more cap openings are arranged in one or more arrays; and wherein none of the one or more cap openings is aligned with a suction hole of the main machine housing, and wherein the suction hole is connected to the electric pump, the configuration as disclosed by Larsson for preventing milk from entering the electric pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64).
Re Claim 15, Wang in view of Larsson teach all of the limitations of Claim 11. Wang fails to teach wherein the structure comprises at least one of a concave structure or a convex structure around the cap hole. Larsson teaches wherein the structure (72, 74) comprises a concave structure (80) around the cap hole (59), the configuration as disclosed by Larsson for preventing milk from entering the pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the structure of Wang in view of Bryan to comprise a concave structure around the cap hole as disclosed by Larsson, the configuration for preventing milk from entering the pump (Larsson Col. 3 Lines 55-64).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/10/2026 with respect to 112 indefinite rejection of Claim 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The dependency of Claim 15 has been changed to depend from Claim 11 as opposed to depending from cancelled Claim 14. Therefore, 112 indefinite rejection of Claim 15 is moot and hereinafter withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments directed to 102 rejections begins on Page 7 of the response. Near the top of Page 8, applicant argues with regard to independent Claim 16 that in prior art Wang, the cap is separate from the main machine housing. However, Wang explicitly teaches “the main pump body 10 includes a press cover 15” (Wang Col. 5 Lines 62-65). Therefore, the cover (15) in wang is interpreted as a further structure and member of the main machine housing (10).
Near the bottom of Page 8 of the response, applicant argues the tube structure is separate from the main housing. However, Wang teaches the press cover 15 and air pump 18 as being a part of the main pump body 10 (Wang Col. 5 Lines 62-65; Col. 6 Lines 20-26). If both the press cover 15 and air pump 18 are part of the main pump body 10, than the air pipe 111, that connects the press cover 15 and air pump 18 must surely also be part of the main pump body 10. It is the position of the office that one of ordinary skill would recognize that the tube structure (111) that connects the cover (15) with the electric pump (18), both parts of the main machine housing (10), is also a part of the main machine housing (10). On Page 9 of the response, applicant argues “the air pipe 111 in Wang is positioned between the air pump 18 and the air outlet 153,” not “the suction hole is provided between the tube structure and the electric pump.” However, air pipe 111 protrudes out of air outlet 153 away from the air pump 18 and thus places the suction hole (153) between the tube structure (111) and the electric pump (18).
At the bottom of Page 9 of the response, applicant’s arguments turn to 103 rejections. With regard to Claim 1, the above arguments directed to 102 rejections of independent Claim 16 are again applicable. Applicant’s arguments move to Claims 4 and 6, Claim 7, Claim 10 and Claim 17. These arguments are covered above. At the bottom of Page 11, Applicant’s turn to Claims 11-13 and 15, Claim 11 being an independent claim. At the top of Page 12, applicant argues that secondary reference Larsson had been improperly mapped. In particular, applicant argues “the bridging member 78 is a solid, central structure whose sole disclosed function is to support the porous body 20.” However, bridging member is concentric with internal opening 59a, which means it comprises an opening.
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 WILLIAM R FREHE whose telephone number is (571)272-8225. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30AM-7:30PM.
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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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.
/WILLIAM R FREHE/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/KEVIN C SIRMONS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
