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. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not a concise explanation of the invention, but it repeats the claim language. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Drawings Figures 5 and 6 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated, since the Figs show Flexicoker system and fluidized cooking system, known in the art. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 1-3, 6, 8-9, and 19-21 are objected to because of the following informalities: The term “about” does not provide an exactitude, but rather a contemplated variation. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. If the certification for the International Sustainability and Carbon Certificatio n to be chemical circular polymer is updated, the new requirements and / or test , wouldn’t be supported by the spec as filed. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: Converting the coker naphtha into at least one polymer. How? By breaking the polymeric waste, a reaction, a pyrolysis, or any other means. All the claims 1 are also rejected. The term “ partially ” in claim s 1 and 19 is relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ partially ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. All the claims dependent of claims 1 and 19 are also rejected. The term “portion ” in claim s 11, 13, 16-18, and 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ portion ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. All the claims dependent of claim 19 are also rejected. Claim 13 is 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. It is unclear what the limitation “certificate” intended to be, making the claim indefinite. Claim 14 is 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. The claim recites “ the polymer is certified circular in accordance with International Sustainability and Carbon Certification .” It is unclear what would be the requirements , compositions, and / or other process / methods to be called a certificate polymer. Furthermore, if the requirements for the certification would change over time, the certification would be valid any longer, making unclear the boundaries of the claim limitation. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns , 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: How is the coker naphtha is further converted ? Reaction, cracking, pyrolysis , or any other way. All the claims dependent of claim 15 are also rejected. 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 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Timken (US 2021/ 0301210 A1 ) (“Timken” herein) Claim 1. Timken discloses, as best understood based on the indefiniteness above , a method of producing circular chemical products comprising : (See Fig. 2) providing a coker naphtha that is at least partially derived from polymeric waste, [0008-0009] wherein the coker naphtha has a total halide content of about 1 wppm to about 0.5 wt%, a 2-3 ring aromatic content of about 0 wt% to about 5 wt%, and a sulfur content of about 750 ppm to about 2 wt%; [Table 1] and converting the coker naphtha into at least a polymer. [0024-0026] Since Timken discloses the same composition derived from a polymeric waste containing , halide, sulfur, may contain ring aromatic, it would be a coker naphtha that produce circulate chemical products. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties”. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I ), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp v Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp v DF Newfield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY1934). Claim 2. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the coker naphtha is derived from co-processing of polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C. [0028, 0034-0037, 0043, 0048-0049] Claim 3. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein providing the coker naphtha comprises: coking a feedstock comprising the polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C to form at least a coker effluent and coke; and separating the coker naphtha from the coker effluent . [0028, 0034-0037, 0043, 0048-0049] Claim 4. Timken discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the polymeric waste comprises plastic waste. [0008-0009] Claim 5. Timken discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the heavy oil comprises petroleum vacuum resid. [0034-0037, 0069 ] Claim 6. Timken discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the feedstock comprises the polymeric waste in an amount of about 0.1 wt% to about 25 wt%. [0010, 0037] Claim 7. Timken discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the coking comprises exposing the feedstock to delayed coking conditions. [002 0] Claim 8. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein providing the coker naphtha comprises pyrolyzing the polymeric waste to produce at least a pyrolysis oil and then coking at least the pyrolysis oil and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C. [0028, 0034-0037, 0043, 0048-0049] Claim 9. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the coker naphtha comprises basic nitrogen in an amount of about 100 wppm to about 5000 wppm. (Table 1) Claim 10. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the polymeric waste comprises plastic waste. [0008 -0009, 0024-0026] Claim 11. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is attributable to one or more polymers in the polymeric waste. [0024-0026] Claim 12. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the polymer comprises a circular polymer. [0024-0026] Claim 13. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is certified circular. [0024-0026] Claim 14. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is certified circular in accordance with International Sustainability and Carbon Certification. [0024-0026] Claim 15. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the coker naphtha is further converted into at least one chemical product selected from the group consisting of a monomer, an aromatic, a synthetic elastomer, a synthetic rubber, an epoxy, a resin, isopropyl alcohol, an oxo-alcohol, and combinations thereof. [0022-0026] Claim 16. Timken discloses the method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises cracking at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent, recovering olefins from the cracking effluent; and polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins to form at least a polyolefin . [00022-0026, 0034-0040] Claim 17. The method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises hydroprocessing at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a hydroprocessed naphtha; cracking at least a portion of the hydroprocessed naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent; recovering olefins from the cracking effluent; and polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins to form at least a polyolefin. [00022-0026, 0034-0040, 0067] Claim 18. The method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises hydroprocessing at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a hydroprocessed naphtha; catalytically reforming at least a portion of the hydroprocessed naphtha to form a reformate; and recovering aromatics from at least a portion of the reformate. [00022-0026, 0034-0040, 0067] Claim 19. Timken discloses , as best understood based on the indefiniteness above, a method of producing circular chemical products comprising: (See Fig. 2) cracking at least a coker naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent, [0008-0009, 0011, 0034] wherein the coker naphtha is at least partially derived from polymeric waste, wherein the coker naphtha has a total halide content of about 1 wppm to about 0.5 wt%, a 2-3 ring aromatic content of about 0 wt% to about 5 wt%, and a sulfur content of about 750 ppm to about 2 wt%; [Table 1] recovering olefins from the cracking effluent; [0012, 0023-0026] and polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins to form at least a polyolefin. [0024-0026] Since Timken discloses the same composition derived from a polymeric waste containing , halide, sulfur, may contain ring aromatic, it would be a coker naphtha that produce circulate chemical products. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties”. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I ), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp v Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp v DF Newfield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY1934). Claim 20. Timken discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising coking a feedstock comprising the polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C to form at least a coker effluent and coke; and separating the coker naphtha from the coker effluent . [0028, 0034-0037, 0043, 0048-0049] Claim 21. Timken discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the coker naphtha comprises basic nitrogen in an amount of about 100 wppm to about 5000 wppm. [Table 1] Claim 22. Timken discloses the method of 19, wherein the polyolefin comprises a circular polyolefin. [0024-0026] Cl aim 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. 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. Claim s 1 -22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harandi e et al. (WO 2021/091724 A1) and further in view of Timken et al. (US 2021/0301210 A1) (“Timken” herein) . Claim 1. Harandi discloses , as best understood based on the indefiniteness above , a method of producing circular chemical products comprising: providing a coker naphtha that is at least partially derived from polymeric waste, [ 0015, 0019-0021, 006 0 -0063 ] and converting the coker naphtha into at least a monomers . [ 0003, 0013, 0016] Harandi however does not explicitly disclose wherein the coker naphtha has a total halide content of about 1 wppm to about 0.5 wt%, a 2-3 ring aromatic content of about 0 wt% to about 5 wt%, and a sulfur content of about 750 ppm to about 2 wt% and the monomers as polymers. Timken teaches the above limitation (See paragraph s 0023, 0025, 0046, & Table 1 → Timken teaches this limitation in that t he present process converts pyrolyzed polyethylene and/or polypropylene waste plastic in large quantities by integrating the waste polymer pyrolysis product streams into an oil refinery operation. The resulting processes produce the feedstocks for the polymers (naphtha or C.sub.3-C.sub.4 or C.sub.3 only for ethylene cracker), high quality gasoline and diesel fuel, and/or quality base oil. B y adding refinery operations to upgrade the waste pyrolysis oil and wax to higher value products (gasoline, jet and diesel) and to produce clean LPG and naphtha for steam cracker for ultimate polyethylene polymer production, one is able to create positive economics for the overall process from recycled plastics to polyethylene product with quality identical to that of the virgin polymer. Pyrolysis oil and wax samples were obtained from commercial sources and their properties are summarized in Table 1. These pyrolysis samples were prepared from waste plastics containing mostly polyethylene and polypropylene via thermal decomposition in a pyrolysis reactor at around 400-600° C., near atmospheric pressure without any added gas or a catalyst. A pyrolysis unit typically produces gas, liquid oil product, optionally wax product, and char. The pyrolysis unit's overhead gas stream containing thermally cracked hydrocarbon was cooled to collect condensate as pyrolysis oil (liquid at ambient temperature) and/or pyrolysis wax (solid at ambient temperature). The pyrolysis oil is the main product of the pyrolysis units. Some units produce pyrolysis wax as a separate product in addition to the pyrolysis oil. For the purpose of having a continuous process for converting waste plastic into recycle for polyethylene polymerization . [0008] Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Harandi, with the above limitation, as taught by Timken, in order to provide a continuous process for converting waste plastic into recycle for polyethylene polymerization . Since Harandi teaches the same composition derived from a polymeric waste containing , halide, sulfur, may contain ring aromatic, it would be a coker naphtha that produce circulate chemical products. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties”. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and /or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP 2112.01 (I ), In re Best, 562 F2d at 1255, 195 USPQ at 433, Titanium Metals Corp v Banner, 778 F2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed Cir 1985) , In re Ludtke, 441 F2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) and Northam Wareen Corp v DF Newfield Co, 7 F Supp 773, 22 USPQ 313 (EDNY1934). Claim 2. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the coker naphtha is derived from co-processing of polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C . [0019-00 21] Claim 3. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein providing the coker naphtha comprises: coking a feedstock comprising the polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C [0019-0021] to form at least a coker effluent and coke; and separating the coker naphtha from the coker effluent . [0066-0067] Claim 4. Harandi discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the polymeric waste comprises plastic waste . [0025-0030] Claim 5. The method of claim 3, wherein the heavy oil comprises petroleum vacuum resid. [0019 , 0034 ] Claim 6. Harandi discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the feedstock comprises the polymeric waste in an amount of about 0.1 wt% to about 25 wt%. [ 0020, 0025-0026] Claim 7. Harandi discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the coking comprises exposing the feedstock to delayed coking conditions. [0013-0015] Claim 8. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein providing the coker naphtha comprises pyrolyzing the polymeric waste to produce at least a pyrolysis oil and then coking at least the pyrolysis oil and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C. [002 0-0023] Claim 9. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1. Harandi however does not explicitly disclose , wherein the coker naphtha comprises basic nitrogen in an amount of about 100 wppm to about 5000 wppm. (Same as claim 1) Claim 10. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the polymeric waste comprises plastic waste. [0025-0030] Claim 11. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is attributable to one or more polymers in the polymeric waste. [ 0003, 0025-0030] Claim 12. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the polymer comprises a circular polymer. [ 0003, 0025-0030] Claim 13. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is certified circular. [ 0003, 0025-0030] Claim 14. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the polymer is certified circular in accordance with International Sustainability and Carbon Certification. [ 0003, 0025-0030] Claim 15. Harandi discloses method of claim 1, wherein the coker naphtha is further converted into at least one chemical product selected from the group consisting of a monomer, an aromatic, a synthetic elastomer, a synthetic rubber, an epoxy, a resin, isopropyl alcohol, an oxo-alcohol, and combinations thereof. [0003, 0013, 0016, 0025-0030] Claim 16. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises cracking at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent , [0047-0053, 0067] recovering olefins from the cracking effluent; [0003, 0013,0016] . Harandi does not explicitly disclose the polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins to form at least a polyolefin. (Same as claim 19) Claim 17. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises hydroprocessing at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a hydroprocessed naphtha ; [0062-0067] cracking at least a portion of the hydroprocessed naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent ; [0047-0053] recovering olefins from the cracking effluent; and polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins [0003, 0013, 0016] Harandi does not explicitly disclose to form at least a polyolefin. (Same as claim 19) Claim 18. Harandi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein converting the coker naphtha into at least the polymer comprises hydroprocessing at least a portion of the coker naphtha to form at least a hydroprocessed naphtha; [0062-0067] catalytically reforming at least a portion of the hydroprocessed naphtha to form a reformate; [0031, 0045] and recovering aromatics from at least a portion of the reformate. [0045-0046] Claim 19. Harandi discloses , as best understood based on the indefiniteness above , a method of producing circular chemical products comprising: cracking at least a coker naphtha to form at least a cracking effluent, wherein the coker naphtha is at least partially derived from polymeric waste, recovering olefins from the cracking effluent ; [0047-0053, 0067] Harandi however does not explicitly disclose the coker naphtha has a total halide content of about 1 wppm to about 0.5 wt%, a 2-3 ring aromatic content of about 0 wt% to about 5 wt%, and a sulfur content of about 750 ppm to about 2 wt% (Same as claim 1) Harandi however does not further disclose polymerizing at least a portion of the olefins to form at least a polyolefin. (Same as claim 1) Claim 20. Harandi discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising coking a feedstock comprising the polymeric waste and a heavy oil with a T10 distillation point of about 343°C to about 575°C to form at least a coker effluent and coke; and separating the coker naphtha from the coker effluent. [0020-0023] Claim 21. Harandi discloses the method of claim 19 . Harandi however does not explicitly disclose , wherein the coker naphtha comprises basic nitrogen in an amount of about 100 wppm to about 5000 wppm . (Same as claim 1) Claim 22. Harandi discloses the method of 19 . Harandi however does not explicitly disclose , wherein the polyolefin comprises a circular polyolefin. (Same as claim 19) Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Humpreys et al. (US 2020/0071619 A1) METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING BIOFUEL teaches The present invention relates to the field of renewable energy. More specifically, the present invention relates to the production of biofuel from biomass including, for example, polymeric materials , Al-Ghambi et al. (US 10,472,574 B2) Process And System For Conversion Of Crude Oil To Petrochemicals And Fuel Products Integrating Delayed Coking Of Vacuum Residue teaches Process scheme configurations are disclosed that enable conversion of crude oil feeds with several processing units in an integrated manner into petrochemicals. The designs utilize minimum capital expenditures to prepare suitable feedstocks for the steam cracker complex , and Collins (US 5705724 A) Aromatics Alkylation With Cracked Recycled Plastics teaches A process is disclosed for the production of alkylaromatic compounds employing olefinic liquid from thermally or catalytically cracked plastics as alkylating agent. The process comprises contacting a feedstream comprising alkylatable aromatics and the olefinic liquid with acidic alkylation catalyst under alkylation conditions in an alkylation zone; and recovering an effluent stream comprising alkylaromatic compounds. The alkylation can be performed with the product of plastics pyrolysis or with non-degraded plastic feedstock in-situ with thermal/catalytic degradation of the plastic. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SILVANA C RUNYAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5415 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 7:30-4:30 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Doug Hutton can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-4137 . 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. /SILVANA C RUNYAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 03/05/2026