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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 04/17/2026 has been entered.
Claims 2-3 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7-10, 14-16 and 18-20 are amended.
Claims 1, 4-20 are pending.
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.
(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, 4, 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack (US 4271705 A).
Regarding claim 1, Green discloses a signal generator configured to generate respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Col 3, Lines 1-15, Col 7 Lines 50-65, Fig 4 has periodic pulses for object scanning meaning pulse width and continuous signal with frequency modulation];
a gating switch configured to perform synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal among the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals through the gating switch. [Fig 4 shows pulse from time T1 to T2 meaning one signal sent; See also Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing, moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1]
a transmitter configured to emit the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 1 has transducer #10 that get signals from the gate #24 and gated signal source #20 for object #18 moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1];
a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 1 has receiver #30];
and a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[ Abstract, Fig 1 has signal processor].
Crostack discloses a signal generator configured to generate respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Claim 9 has continous signal, Claim 1 and abstract has desired frequency and modulation; Col 2, Lines 30-40, Col 5 Lines 15-20, Col 6, Lines 15-20 and claim 12 all have pulse width being adjusted];
a gating switch configured to perform synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal among the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals through the gating switch. [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating as well as showing only certain signals passing through moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission];
a transmitter configured to emit the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 6 has acoustic transducer which transmits only the desired signal];
a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 6 has acoustic transducer];
and a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[Col 2 has background of invention using ultrasonic reflections to analyze objects].
Regarding claim 15, Green discloses generating by using the signal generator, respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Col 3, Lines 1-15, Col 7 Lines 50-65, Fig 4 has periodic pulses for object scanning meaning pulse width and continuous signal with frequency modulation];
performing by using the gating switch synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal through the gating switch. [Fig 4 shows pulse from time T1 to T2 meaning one signal sent; See also Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing, moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1]
emitting, by using a transmitter the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal ultrasonic signals, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 1 has transducer #10 that get signals from the gate #24 and gated signal source #20 for object #18 moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1];
receiving by using a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 1 has receiver #30];
and measuring, by and a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[ Abstract, Fig 1 has signal processor].
Crostack discloses generating by using a signal generator, respective continuous ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Claim 9 has continous signal, Claim 1 and abstract has desired frequency and modulation; Col 2, Lines 30-40, Col 5 Lines 15-20, Col 6, Lines 15-20 and claim 12 all have pulse width being adjusted];
performing, by using a gating switch, synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic through the gating switch. [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating as well as showing only certain signals passing through moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission];
emitting, by using the transmitter the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 6 has acoustic transducer which transmits only the desired signal];
a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 6 has acoustic transducer];
and a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[Col 2 has background of invention using ultrasonic reflections to analyze objects].
Regarding claim 20, Green discloses an ultrasonic distance sensor configured to measure a location of an object[Summary of invention has distance to object and time of travel];
and a processor configured to perform an operation of the device by using the measured location of the object[Abstract, Fig 1 has signal processor],
wherein the ultrasonic distance sensor comprises[Fig 1 has sensor]:
a signal generator configured to generate respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Col 3, Lines 1-15, Col 7 Lines 50-65, Fig 4 has periodic pulses for object scanning meaning pulse width and continuous signal with frequency modulation];
a gating switch configured to perform synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal through the gating switch. [Fig 4 shows pulse from time T1 to T2 meaning one signal sent; See also Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing, moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1]
a transmitter configured to emit the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 1 has transducer #10 that get signals from the gate #24 and gated signal source #20 for object #18 moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission; See also claim 1];
a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 1 has receiver #30];
a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[ Abstract, Fig 1 has signal processor].
Crostack discloses an ultrasonic distance sensor configured to measure a location of an object[Col 2 has background of invention using ultrasonic reflections to analyze objects];
and a processor configured to perform an operation of the device by using the measured location of the object[Col 2 has background of invention using ultrasonic reflections to analyze objects],
wherein the ultrasonic distance sensor comprises[Fig 6 shows sensor]:
a signal generator configured to generate respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals by performing frequency modulation in a unit of a pulse width, the pulse width being set based on a target resolution. [Claim 9 has continous signal, Claim 1 and abstract has desired frequency and modulation; Col 2, Lines 30-40, Col 5 Lines 15-20, Col 6, Lines 15-20 and claim 12 all have pulse width being adjusted];
a gating switch configured to perform synchronous time gating in the unit of the set pulse width to pass only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal through the gating switch. [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating as well as showing only certain signals passing through moreover the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter transmission];
a transmitter configured to emit the only one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal, having passed through the gating switch, toward an object, wherein remaining frequency-modulated ultrasonic signals among the respective continuous frequency- modulated ultrasonic signals are not emitted toward the object [Fig 6 has acoustic transducer which transmits only the desired signal];
a receiver configured to receive an echo signal reflected from the object[Fig 6 has acoustic transducer];
and a signal processor configured to measure a location of the object by using the echo signal[Col 2 has background of invention using ultrasonic reflections to analyze objects].
Regarding claim 4, Green discloses wherein the one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal that is allowed to pass through the gating switch is an ultrasonic signal that is first in order among the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals. [Col 4 lines 45-50 has transducer array and Col 3; Lines 1-15 has continuous signal with frequency modulation; See also Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing meaning a signal is chosen first].
Crostack discloses wherein the one frequency modulated ultrasonic signal that is allowed to pass through the gating switch is an ultrasonic signal that is first in order among the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating and pulse is chosen; See also Col 3, Lines 20-25, Col 4, Lines 35-40, Col 5 Lines 35-40].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 5-8, 10, 13, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack (US 4271705 A) as applied to claims 1, 4 and 15 above, and further in view of Petroff (US 5226328 A).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach further comprising a first mixer configured to mix the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals with the echo signal to output a first mixed signal.
Petroff teaches that further comprising a first mixer configured to mix the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals with the echo signal to output a first mixed signal. [Fig 2a has mixer #22 and Fig 7a has mixer #22a]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the mixer Petroff in order to mix the echo with the signal for processing.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach wherein the signal processor is configured to measure the location of the object by performing frequency analysis on the first mixed signal through Fast Fourier transform (FFT).
Petroff teaches wherein the signal processor is configured to measure the location of the object by performing frequency analysis on the first mixed signal through Fast Fourier transform (FFT). [Abstract and Fig 7B and claims 3 has FFT for locating objects as shown in claim 1]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the FFT in Petroff in order to process the signal for object location through frequency analysis.
Regarding claim 7, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach further comprising a first analog-to-digital converter (ADC) configured to convert the first mixed signal into a digital signal and configured to transmit the digital signal to the signal processor. [Though Green has Abstract, claim 1, 9 and 15 have converting echo into electrical signals meaning analog to digital].
Petroff teaches further comprising a first analog-to-digital converter (ADC) configured to convert the first mixed signal into a digital signal and configured to transmit the digital signal to the signal processor. [A/D converter #36 in Fig 2a and #36a in Fig 7a has conversion of analog to digital signal; See also claim 5]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the ADC of Petroff in order to convert analog to digital signals for processing.
Regarding claim 8, Green, as modified, teaches further comprising a signal delayer configured to delay the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals, generated by the signal generator, by a predetermined time period and configured to output the delayed ultrasonic signals. [Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing meaning signals can be delayed based on timing].
Crostack, as modified, teaches further comprising a signal delayer configured to delay the respective continuous frequency modulated ultrasonic signals, generated by the signal generator, by a predetermined time period and configured to output the delayed ultrasonic signals.. [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating meaning pulse timing and shaping would be a delayer for the signals].
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach further comprising a second mixer configured to mix the delayed ultrasonic signals, with the echo signal to output a second mixed signal, wherein the signal processor is configured to measure the location of the object based on a first frequency analysis result of the first mixed signal and a second frequency analysis result of the second mixed signal.
Petroff teaches further comprising a second mixer configured to mix the delayed ultrasonic signals, with the echo signal to output a second mixed signal, [Fig 2a has mixer #22 and Fig 7a has mixer #22a]
wherein the signal processor is configured to measure the location of the object based on a first frequency analysis result of the first mixed signal and a second frequency analysis result of the second mixed signal. [Fig 2a has processor processing the mixed signal]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with duplicate mixers and signal processing of Petroff in order to process the signal for object location through frequency analysis.
Moreover it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate the mixer, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 13, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach further comprising: a first ADC configured to convert the first mixed signal into a first digital signal and configured to transmit the first digital signal to the signal processor; and a second ADC configured to convert the second mixed signal into a second digital signal and configured to transmit the second digital signal to the signal processor. [Though Green has Abstract, claim 1, 9 and 15 have converting echo into electrical signals meaning analog to digital]
Petroff teaches further comprising: a first ADC configured to convert the first mixed signal into a first digital signal and configured to transmit the first digital signal to the signal processor, and a second ADC configured to convert the second mixed signal into a second digital signal and configured to transmit the second digital signal to the signal processor. [A/D converter #36 in Fig 2a and #36a in Fig 7a has conversion of analog to digital signal; See also claim 5]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the ADC of Petroff in order to convert analog to digital signals for processing.
Moreover it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate the ADC, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 18, Green, as modified, teaches delaying the respective continuous frequency modulate ultrasonic signals by a predetermined time period and outputting the delayed ultrasonic signals. [Col 2 Line 60- Col 3 Line 10 has gated signal source #20 in Fig 1 and transmitter gate #24 to control signals from timing meaning signals can be delayed based on timing].
Crostack, as modified, teaches delaying the respective continuous frequency modulate ultrasonic signals by a predetermined time period and outputting the delayed ultrasonic signals. [Fig 6 has gates T1 and T1 for shaping the pulse in terms of duration meaning time gating meaning pulse timing and shaping would be a delayer for the signals]
Claim 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack (US 4271705 A) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Hossack (US 6108273 A).
Regarding claim 9, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach wherein the signal delayer configured to delay the respective continuous ultrasonic signals by a time corresponding to half a pulse width of an ultrasonic signal. [Though having gated signal means delays are possible]
Hossack teaches that wherein the signal delayer configured to delay the respective continuous ultrasonic signals by a time corresponding to half a pulse width of an ultrasonic signal. [Fig 21 has transmit waveform with incremental delay meaning it would read on any arbitrarily chosen pulse width]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the delay of Hossack in order to delay or beamform the signals or simply adjust the timing.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to delay the signals by an arbitrary chosen pulse width, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack 4271705 A) in view of Petroff (US 5226328 A) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Eccardt (US 5761155 A).
Regarding claim 11, Green or Crostack or Petroff does not explicitly teach wherein the signal processor is configured to determine a location, commonly indicated in the first frequency analysis result and the second frequency analysis result, as the location of the object. [Fig 1 shows two sensors finding the object common to it. Filter analys sis and correlation analysis on Col 7 shows frequencies used to find the object]
Eccardt teaches that wherein the signal processor is configured to determine a location, commonly indicated in the first frequency analysis result and the second frequency analysis result, as the location of the object. [Fig 1 shows two sensors finding the object common to it. Filter analysis and correlation analysis on Col 7 shows frequencies used to find the object]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the multiple readings of Eccardt in order to use multiple readings to locate and object.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack (US 4271705 A) in view of Petroff (US 5226328 A) and Eccardt (US 5761155 A) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Kishi (US 20060281429 A1) or Fasching (US 5337289 A).
Regarding claim 12, Kishi teaches wherein the signal processor is configured to determine the location of the object based on a result of multiplying an amplitude of the first frequency analysis result by an amplitude of the second frequency analysis result. [0131 has multiplier on amplitude of output signal]
Fasching teaches wherein the signal processor is configured to determine the location of the object based on a result of multiplying an amplitude of the first frequency analysis result by an amplitude of the second frequency analysis result. [Col 7, Lines 1-5 have multiplier on amplitude]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the multiplier of Kishi or Fasching in order to user a multiplier on amplitude for processing the signal for compensation or beamshaping.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (US 4016750 A) or Crostack (US 4271705 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pure (US 3469229 A) or Gonzalez (US 20210080570 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Green or Crostack does not explicitly teach wherein a plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers are provided, and wherein the signal processor is configured to reconstruct a multi-dimensional space around the object by using the plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers.
Pure teaches wherein a plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers are provided, and wherein the signal processor is configured to reconstruct a multi-dimensional space around the object by using the plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers. [Claim 3 has pairs of transmitters and receivers and Col 5, Lines 40-50 have display on chart meaning 2 dimensional space]
Gonzalez teaches that wherein a plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers are provided, and wherein the signal processor is configured to reconstruct a multi-dimensional space around the object by using the plurality of pairs of transmitters and receivers. [0033 and 0054-0055 pairs of transmitters and receivers and 0031 have display meaning 2 dimensional space]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the sensor in Green or Crostack with the multiple pairs of transmitters and receivers of Pure or Gonzalez for more coverage and redundancy and to have a two dimensional screen display.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicants arguments on page 15 of the remarks it is pointed out that applicant is reading the prior art overly narrowly and the present rejection clearly shows how frequency modulation and transmission and filtering are well known in the art as the very purpose of a gate or filter is to filter the desired transmission and perform frequency modulation to only allow the desired frequency transmission meaning the remaining frequencies by default do not pass. Applicant’s arguments and amendment attempt are mostly descriptive in its attempt to claim a limitation well known to a person of ordinary skill in the art as applicant is simply attempting to claim frequency modulation and filtering.
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Rejections are maintained – and no allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
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 VIKAS NMN ATMAKURI whose telephone number is (571)272-5080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at (571)272-6970. 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.
/VIKAS ATMAKURI/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights