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 .
Election/Restrictions
The species restriction requirement, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 11/14/2025, is hereby withdrawn and claims 1-13 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. , filed on 12/12/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/31/2025 and 04/04/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1: “a receiving device that is configured to receive a first signal”; “generate, via a first signal processing, a second operating signal”; “a second signal processing provides the at least one signal parameter with a variation”; and “a transmitting device that is configured to convert the second operating signal into a second signal and to send the second signal”
Claim 8: “receiving a first signal…, by a receiving device”; “converting the first signal into a first operating signal by the receiving device”; “generating, by a first signal processing, a second operating signal”; “converting the second operating signal into a second signal; and sending the second signal via a transmitting device”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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 claim 1, the claim limitations “a receiving device that is configured to receive a first signal”; “generate, via a first signal processing, a second operating signal”; “a second signal processing provides the at least one signal parameter with a variation”; and “a transmitting device that is configured to convert the second operating signal into a second signal and to send the second signal” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Paragraphs [00038] and [00047] describe the receiving device (RX of Fig. 1) illustrated in Fig. 1. The specification lacks any description of the device other than the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. Paragraphs [00038]-[00042] describe the generation of the operating signals (A1 and A2 of Fig. 1), again the specification lacks any description of the device performing the function, there is no structural description, only the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. Paragraphs [00042] and [00047] describe the transmitting device (TX of Fig. 1) illustrated in Fig. 1. The specification lacks any description of the device other than the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. The components are generic signal equipment. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2181B
Regarding claim 8, the claim limitations “receiving a first signal…, by a receiving device”; “converting the first signal into a first operating signal by the receiving device”; “generating, by a first signal processing, a second operating signal”; “converting the second operating signal into a second signal; and sending the second signal via a transmitting device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Paragraphs [00038] and [00047] describe the receiving device (RX of Fig. 1) illustrated in Fig. 1. The specification lacks any description of the device other than the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. Paragraphs [00038]-[00042] describe the conversion and generation of the operating signals (A1 and A2 of Fig. 1), again the specification lacks any description of the device performing the function, there is no structural description, only the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. Paragraphs [00042] and [00047] describe the transmitting device (TX of Fig. 1) illustrated in Fig. 1. The specification lacks any description of the device other than the functional claim language describing what it does without describing what it is. The components are generic signal equipment. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2181B
Claims 2-7 and 9-13 are also rejected based on their dependency of the defected parent claim.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As shown above, claim elements of 1 and 8 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) but the disclosure not does not provide adequate structure for performing the function.
A means- (or step-) plus-function limitation that is found to be indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on failure of the specification to disclose corresponding structure, material or act that performs the entire claimed function also lacks adequate written description. A mere restatement of the function in the specification without more description of the means that accomplish the function fails to provide adequate written description under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (MPEP 2181(IV)).
Claims 2-7 and 9-13 are also rejected based on their dependency of the defected parent claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gruber US 20200300968.
Regarding claim 1, Gruber discloses a simulation device for a surroundings sensor system configured to detect at least one particular object based on a respective signal echo, the simulation device comprising ([0083] FIG. 3 shows a test bed for the stimulation of a radar sensor RS, e.g. a vehicle, from different directions. The test bed in particular comprises a receiver device RX for receiving radar signals output by the radar sensor RS.):
a receiving device that is configured to receive a first signal that is sent from the surroundings sensor system and to convert it into a first operating signal ([0083] The test bed in particular comprises a receiver device RX for receiving radar signals output by the radar sensor RS);
a signal path that is connected to the receiving device for accepting the first operating signal, the signal path being configured to generate, via a first signal processing, a second operating signal that is a function of the first operating signal and the respective signal echo, the respective signal echo comprising at least one signal parameter ([0083] The original signal U is divided in a delay and modulation module 2 of the radar target emulator 1 such that a correspondingly modulated output signal Am based on the original signal can be output for each object to be emulated.), wherein a second signal processing provides the at least one signal parameter with a variation ([0084] In the embodiment shown, the modulated output signals Am are provided at a switching device 100 preferably designed to receive each of the modulated output signals Am); and a
transmitting device that is configured to convert the second operating signal into a second signal and to send the second signal to the surroundings sensor system ([0085] In one embodiment, the transmitter devices TX are designed to transmit input second output signals A2 as output from the switching device 100 to the radar sensor RS in the form of electromagnetic radiation. In other words, the transmitter devices TX are designed to convert the second output signals A2 into radar signals.).
Regarding claim 2, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 1, wherein the second signal processing has an interface for receiving an input signal, and wherein the second signal processing is configured to generate the variation as a function of the input signal ([0070] The adder device 116 combines a second input signal E2 and the branch signal into a second output signal A2.).
Regarding claim 3, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 1, wherein the first signal processing is configured to generate a delay and/or a signal strength and/or a signal frequency as the at least one signal parameter ([0076] The following will now describe the structure and operation of a time delay array 200 having a time delay device 210, a branching device 220 and preferably an amplifier device 230 as applicable. An original signal U is delayed by the time delay device 210.).
Regarding claim 4, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 1, wherein the second signal processing is configured to generate the variation periodically and/or in a randomized manner and/or for a specified time period ([0079] In order to generate a more realistic radar signal, it is further possible according to the embodiment of FIG. 1 to generate interference signals as an additional component of the modulated output signal Am. The interference signal arrangements can thereby produce a non-synchronous interference signal, as for example with interference signal arrangement 340a, or a synchronous interference signal, as with interference signal arrangement 340b.).
Regarding claim 5, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 1, wherein the second signal processing is configured to determine a magnitude of the variation and/or a repetition frequency of the variation, the determination taking place in particular as a function of the input signal ([0076] Similar to the operating of the target emulation array 300 described herein, a corresponding signal (here an interference signal) is generated by the interference signal arrangements 340a, 340b, its amplitude adapted by the variable attenuating and/or amplifying device, and transmitted via the adder device 344 as a component of the modulated output signal Am.).
Regarding claim 6, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 1, wherein the first signal processing has a digital and/or analog design, and wherein the second signal processing has a digital and/or analog design ([0087] The delay and modulation module 2 can be of at least partly digital configuration. In particular, the delay and modulation module 2 can be at least partially implemented as a computer program able to be executed on a (not shown) central processing unit and delay and modulate the original signal U when applicably executed.).
Regarding claim 7, Gruber discloses the simulation device according to claim 6, wherein for the analog design ([0011] This is in particular advantageous since an at least substantially all-analog switch architecture can thereby be used for the interconnecting and transmitting of the radar waves.), the simulation device further comprises delay elements adapted to be switched on and via which the signal echo and/or the variation are generated ([0010] One aspect of the present invention relates to a switching device for a radar target emulator, particularly of the type as described herein, comprising: at least one first switch arrangement and one second switch arrangement, each having a branching device which is designed to receive a first input signal, to branch it into a branch signal and a first output signal; a switching means which is designed to transmit the branch signal in a first switching state within the switch arrangement and not transmit in a second switching state; and an adder device which is designed to output the signal transmitted in the first switching state of the switching means at least as a component of a second output signal, wherein the first switch arrangement and the second switch arrangement are interconnected in such a manner that a first input signal of the second switch arrangement comprises, in particular forms, a first output signal of the first switch arrangement, or a second input signal of the second switch arrangement comprises, in particular forms, a second output signal of the first switch arrangement.).
Regarding claim 8, Gruber discloses a method for operating a simulation device for a surroundings sensor system configured to detect at least one particular object based on a respective signal echo ([0083] FIG. 3 shows a test bed for the stimulation of a radar sensor RS, e.g. a vehicle, from different directions. The test bed in particular comprises a receiver device RX for receiving radar signals output by the radar sensor RS.), the method comprising:
receiving a first signal sent by the surroundings sensor system, by a receiving device ([0083] The test bed in particular comprises a receiver device RX for receiving radar signals output by the radar sensor RS);
converting the first signal into a first operating signal by the receiving device ([0076] An original signal U is delayed by the time delay device 210. As previously described above, a distance of an object to be emulated from the test sensor is imaged by way of said delay. The signal delayed as such is branched by the branching device 220, whereby a branch signal is amplified by the amplifier device 230 and supplied to a first switch arrangement 110a as first input signal E1..);
accepting the first operating signal by a signal path ([0077] According to one implementation, the original signal U is a signal output by a real-world radar sensor of a test vehicle, received by a receiver device arranged ahead of the time delay array 200, and fed to the time delay array 200.);
generating, by a first signal processing, a second operating signal that is derived from the respective signal echo and the first operating signal, the respective signal echo comprising at least one signal parameter, wherein a second signal processing provides the at least one signal parameter with a variation ([0084] In the embodiment shown, the modulated output signals Am are provided at a switching device 100 preferably designed to receive each of the modulated output signals Am);
converting the second operating signal into a second signal (); and
sending the second signal via a transmitting device ([0085] In one embodiment, the transmitter devices TX are designed to transmit input second output signals A2 as output from the switching device 100 to the radar sensor RS in the form of electromagnetic radiation).
Regarding claim 9, Gruber discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein the second signal processing generates the variation as a function of an input signal ([0070] The adder device 116 combines a second input signal E2 and the branch signal into a second output signal A2.).
Regarding claim 10, Gruber discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein a delay and/or a signal strength and/or a signal frequency are/is generated by the first signal processing as the at least one signal parameter ([0076] The following will now describe the structure and operation of a time delay array 200 having a time delay device 210, a branching device 220 and preferably an amplifier device 230 as applicable. An original signal U is delayed by the time delay device 210.).
Regarding claim 11, Gruber discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein the variation is generated periodically and/or in a randomized manner and/or for a specified time period by the second signal processing ([0079] In order to generate a more realistic radar signal, it is further possible according to the embodiment of FIG. 1 to generate interference signals as an additional component of the modulated output signal Am. The interference signal arrangements can thereby produce a non-synchronous interference signal, as for example with interference signal arrangement 340a, or a synchronous interference signal, as with interference signal arrangement 340b.).
Regarding claim 12, Gruber discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein a magnitude of the variation and/or a repetition frequency of the variation are/is determined by the second signal processing, the determination taking place as a function of the input signal ([0076] Similar to the operating of the target emulation array 300 described herein, a corresponding signal (here an interference signal) is generated by the interference signal arrangements 340a, 340b, its amplitude adapted by the variable attenuating and/or amplifying device, and transmitted via the adder device 344 as a component of the modulated output signal Am.).
Regarding claim 13, Gruber discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein, for an analog design of the first and/or the second signal processing, delay elements are switched on ([0011] This is in particular advantageous since an at least substantially all-analog switch architecture can thereby be used for the interconnecting and transmitting of the radar waves.).
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-20210055383 discloses a method of testing vehicular radar includes acquiring binary phase codes of transmitters in a radar device under test DUT; acquiring desired fields of view and desired angular resolutions of the transmitters to determine target angles of emulated targets; calculating excess roundtrip time delay for each emulation delay, between the DUT and the emulated targets, and each setup delay between the DUT and each emulator receiver; time-shifting the resultant phase symbol streams by the excess roundtrip time delays; subtracting the time-shifted resultant phase symbol streams from the resultant phase symbol streams to obtain difference phase symbol streams; and emulating the echo signals at the target angles.
US-20200363503 discloses a test system to simulate a moving target for a radar system under test. The test system includes a Doppler simulation circuit, coupled to an input, to apply a frequency shift to RF pulses received on an RF signal generated by the radar system to simulate speed. A signal delay sub-system produces a delay in the RF pulses to simulate distance. A pulse detection circuit is to detect time of receipt of the RF pulses, including a first time of receipt of a falling edge of a first RF pulse. An I/O controller updates a value of the frequency shift for the Doppler simulation circuit and of the delay for the signal delay sub-system during a time period between the first RF pulse and one of a second RF pulse or a second time at which the second RF pulse should have been received in case of a missing pulse.
US-20190041496 discloses a radar test computing system includes a host interface coupled to a programmable input/output (I/O) controller, which is to interface with propagation path replicator (PPR) circuitry. A processing device is to detect a start signal received from the controller; receive an update request from the controller in response to detection, by the PPR circuitry, of a first radio RF pulse on a RF signal received from the radar system; retrieve scenario data of distance to and speed of the moving target for a second RF pulse expected to follow the first RF pulse; calculate, using retrieved scenario data, values of a frequency shift, a signal delay, and a signal attenuation for the second RF pulse; and send, during a time period between the first and second RF pulses, these values to the controller for use by the PPR circuitry to simulate the moving target for the second RF pulse.
US-20100109940 discloses a device to simulate a radar signal reflected from a moving target including a receiver for receiving a radar signal and a device for modulating the radar signal with a Doppler frequency to produce a modulated signal simulating the radar signal reflected from a moving target. The device further includes a transmitter for transmitting the modulated signal. The device for modulating the radar signal is arranged to simulate the radar signal reflected from a simulated moving target having a length selected by a user.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN BS ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-4145. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at (571)272-6878. 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.
/JBSA/Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646