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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Received 07/09/2026
Claim(s) 1-10 and 12-18 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-10, and 12-13 has/have been amended.
Claim(s) 11 has/have been cancelled.
The objections to claim 1 have been withdrawn in view of the amendments received on 07/09/2026.
The 35 U.S.C § 103 rejection to claim(s) 1-10, 12, and 13 have been fully considered in view of the amendments received on 07/09/2026 and are fully addressed in the prior art rejection below.
Response to Arguments
Received 07/09/2026
Regarding independent claim(s) 1, 12, and 13:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 8: ¶ 2-4), filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Wherein, Aizawa (US PGPUB No. 20190349531 A1) fails to disclose one or more limitations within the amended claims. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yoshimura et al. (US PGPUB No. 20180184072 A1), and further in view of Hanamoto (US PGPUB No. 20180182114 A1).
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 8: ¶ 5), filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due claim 12's and claim 13's similarity to claim 1. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
Regarding dependent claim(s) 2-9:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 8: ¶ 5 to Page 9: ¶ 1), filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-9 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due the dependency upon claim 1 respectively. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-14, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura et al., US PGPUB No. 20180184072 A1, hereinafter Yoshimura, and further in view of Hanamoto, US PGPUB No. 20180182114 A1, hereinafter Hanamoto.
Regarding claim 1, Yoshimura discloses a display control apparatus (Yoshimura; a display control (i.e. image processing) apparatus [¶ 0021 and ¶ 0026]; moreover, computer system [¶ 0089]) comprising:
one or more memories storing instructions (Yoshimura; one or more memories storing instructions [¶ 0021-0023]); and
one or more processors executing the instructions (Yoshimura; one or more processors executing the instructions [¶ 0021-0022]; moreover, CRM [¶ 0089]) to:
acquire virtual camera information including a position of a point of gaze that is a position gazed at from a virtual camera (Yoshimura; acquire virtual camera information including a position of a point of gaze that is a position gazed at from a virtual camera [¶ 0026-0029]; moreover, virtual camera info (x,y,z) [¶ 0028-0029 and ¶ 0057]), wherein virtual camera corresponds to a virtual viewpoint image that is generated based on a plurality of images captured by a plurality of imaging apparatuses (Yoshimura; the virtual camera corresponds to a virtual viewpoint image that is generated [¶ 0026-0029] based on a plurality of images captured by a plurality of imaging apparatuses [¶ 0024-0025 and ¶ 051-0052], as illustrated within Figs. 2A-B and Figs. 4A-B; wherein, a plurality of images captured by a plurality of imaging apparatuses [¶ 0002]) and wherein a position of the virtual camera is different from a position of each of the plurality of imaging apparatuses (Yoshimura; wherein a position of the virtual camera is different from a position of each of the plurality of imaging apparatuses [¶ 0051-0052], as illustrated within Figs. 4A-B; moreover, Fig. 4B illustrates, virtual viewpoints positions of the virtual cameras 404, 405, and 406 are different from a position of each of the plurality of imaging apparatuses 201-210); and
display an image including a point of gaze object indicating the position of the point of gaze and a projected point of gaze object indicating a position of the point of gaze on a projection in a virtual space (Yoshimura; display an image including a point of gaze object indicating the position of the point of gaze and a projected point of gaze object indicating a position of the point of gaze on a projection in a virtual space (i.e. camera work setting area) [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Figs. 11-12), wherein the projected point of gaze object is separated from the point of gaze object (Yoshimura; the projected point of gaze object is separated from the point of gaze object [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Figs. 11-12; wherein, Figs. 11-12 illustrate, the projected point of gaze object (end point 1202) is separated from the point of gaze object (start point 1201)).
Yoshimura fails to disclose a projection plane in a virtual space.
However, Hanamoto teaches to: display an image including a point of gaze object indicating the position of the point of gaze and a projected point of gaze object indicating a position of the point of gaze on a projection plane in a virtual space (Hanamoto; displaying an image including a point of gaze object indicating the position of the point of gaze and a projected point of gaze object indicating a position of the point of gaze on a projection plane in a virtual space (i.e. virtual viewpoint image) [¶ 0039 and ¶ 0042], as illustrated within Figs. 7A-B; moreover, a projection plane in a virtual space [¶ 0044], as illustrated within Fig. 9), wherein the projected point of gaze object is separated from the point of gaze object (Hanamoto; the projected point of gaze object is separated from the point of gaze object [¶ 0039], as illustrated within Figs. 7A-B).
Yoshimura and Hanamoto are considered to be analogous art because both pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce virtual imaging.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura, to incorporate to: display an image including a point of gaze object indicating the position of the point of gaze and a projected point of gaze object indicating a position of the point of gaze on a projection plane in a virtual space, wherein the projected point of gaze object is separated from the point of gaze object (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction from the virtual camera (Yoshimura; the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction (i.e. virtual viewpoint path) from the virtual viewpoint [¶ 0047-0048 and ¶ 0051-0052], as illustrated within Figs. 4A-B; moreover, a virtual viewpoint video image is generated by using these captured images, on a condition that the virtual viewpoint image at each position on the virtual viewpoint path is generated with the same focal length, a large difference in the blur amount arises between the virtual viewpoint images generated at each position [¶ 0053]).
Hanamoto further teaches the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction from the virtual camera (Hanamoto; the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction from the virtual camera [¶ 0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction from the virtual camera (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 3, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the projected point of gaze object is generated based on a projection of the point of gaze on the projection (Yoshimura; the projected point of gaze object is generated based on a projection of the point of gaze on the projection [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Figs. 11-12).
Hanamoto further teaches the projected point of gaze object is generated based on a projection of the point of gaze on the projection plane (Hanamoto; the projected point of gaze object is generated based on a projection of the point of gaze on the projection plane [¶ 0039 and ¶ 0044], as illustrated within Figs. 7A-B and Fig. 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the virtual camera information includes a position of the virtual camera and a line of sight direction from the virtual camera (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image is a virtual viewpoint image corresponding to another virtual camera different from the virtual camera (Yoshimura; the image is a virtual viewpoint image corresponding to another virtual camera different from the virtual camera [¶ 0051-0053], as illustrated within Figs. 4A-B; wherein, Fig. 4B illustrates, one or more virtual cameras).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera (Yoshimura; the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Figs. 11-12).
Regarding claim 7, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the point of gaze object in the image (Yoshimura; the virtual viewpoint object [¶ 0052-0053] is at a position not overlapping the point of gaze object in the image [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Fig. 12).
Hanamoto further teaches the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the point of gaze object in the image (Hanamoto; the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the point of gaze object in the image [¶ 0039], as illustrated within Figs. 7A-B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the point of gaze object in the image (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 8, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the projected point of gaze object in the image (Yoshimura; the virtual viewpoint object [¶ 0052-0053] is at a position not overlapping the projected point of gaze object in the image [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Fig. 12).
Hanamoto further teaches the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the projected point of gaze object in the image (Hanamoto; the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the projected point of gaze object in the image [¶ 0039], as illustrated within Figs. 7A-B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the virtual camera object is at a position not overlapping the projected point of gaze object in the image (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 9, the rejection of claim 9 is addressed within the rejection of claim 7 & 8, due to the similarities claim 9 and claim 7 & 8 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 7 & 8 regarding the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 12 is addressed within the rejection of claim 1, due to the similarities claim 12 and claim 1 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 1 regarding the rejection of claim 12. Although, claim 12 and claim 1 may not be identical, it is reasonable to reject claim 12 based on the prior art teachings and rational within the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, the rejection of claim 13 is addressed within the rejection of claim 1, due to the similarities claim 13 and claim 1 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 1 regarding the rejection of claim 13. Although, claim 13 and claim 1 may not be identical, it is reasonable to reject claim 13 based on the prior art teachings and rational within the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, in the virtual space, the point of gaze and the point of gaze object are separated from the projection plane (Yoshimura; the point of gaze and the point of gaze object are separated from the projection in the virtual space (i.e. camera work setting area) [¶ 0080-0081]).
Hanamoto further teaches wherein, in the virtual space, the point of gaze and the point of gaze object are separated from the projection plane (Hanamoto; the point of gaze and the point of gaze object are separated from the projection plane in the virtual space [¶ 0039 and ¶ 0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate wherein, in the virtual space, the point of gaze and the point of gaze object are separated from the projection plane (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Regarding claim 16, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a distance between the point of gaze object and the projected point of gaze object in the image indicates a distance between the point of gaze object and the projection plane (Yoshimura; a distance between the point of gaze object and the projected point of gaze object in the image indicates a distance between the point of gaze object and the projection plane [¶ 0080-0082]).
Regarding claim 17, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the projection plane is coplanar with a floor, a wall, or a ceiling that is depicted in the plurality of images captured by the plurality of imaging apparatuses (Hanamoto; the projection plane [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] is coplanar with a floor [¶ 0044], as illustrated within Fig. 9, that is depicted in the plurality of images captured by the plurality of imaging apparatuses [¶ 0030], as illustrated within Fig. 2A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the projection plane is coplanar with a floor, a wall, or a ceiling that is depicted in the plurality of images captured by the plurality of imaging apparatuses (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Claim(s) 6 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto as applied to claim(s) 4 and 5 above, and further in view of Yoneda et al., US PGPUB No. 20200275083 A1, hereinafter Yoneda.
Regarding claim 6, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to determine another virtual camera corresponding to the image including the point of gaze object, the projected point of gaze object, and the virtual camera object (Yoshimura; the one or more processors further execute the instructions [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] to implicitly determine another virtual camera (given selecting one or more viewpoints) corresponding to the image [¶ 0052-0053], as illustrated within Fig. 4B, including the point of gaze object, the projected point of gaze object, and the virtual camera object [¶ 0080-0081], as illustrated within Fig. 12; moreover, image combination is performed by using a plurality of reference images selected by the virtual viewpoint video image generation unit [¶ 0047]), the other virtual camera being different from the virtual camera (Yoshimura; the another virtual viewpoint being different from the virtual viewpoint [¶ 0051-0053], as illustrated within Figs. 4B and 5A).
Hanamoto further teaches another virtual camera corresponding to the image including the point of gaze object, the projected point of gaze object, and the virtual camera object (Hanamoto; another virtual camera [¶ 0064] corresponding to the image including the point of gaze object, the projected point of gaze object, and the virtual camera object [¶ 0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate another virtual camera corresponding to the image including the point of gaze object, the projected point of gaze object, and the virtual camera object (as taught by Hanamoto), in order to provide improved image quality within a virtualized media environment to a user (Hanamoto; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0005]).
Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto fails to explicitly disclose to determine another virtual camera.
However, Yoneda teaches to determine another virtual camera (Yoneda; determining another virtual camera [¶ 0081-0084]; additionally, utilization of multiple virtual cameras [¶ 0140-0142], as illustrated within Fig. 10); and
the other virtual camera being different from the virtual camera (Yoneda; the other virtual camera being different from the virtual camera [¶ 0140-0142], as illustrated within Fig. 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate determine another virtual camera; and the other virtual camera being different from the virtual camera (as taught by Yoneda), in order to provide ease of use for generating desired virtual imaging (Yoneda; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0006]).
Regarding claim 18, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 4, the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera (Hanamoto; the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera [¶ 0047]).
Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto fails to explicitly disclose the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera.
However, Yoneda teaches wherein the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera (Yoneda; the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera [¶ 0080], as illustrated within Fig. 4B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate wherein the image includes a virtual camera object representing the virtual camera (as taught by Yoneda), in order to provide ease of use for generating desired virtual imaging (Yoneda; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0006]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto as applied to claim(s) 5 above, and further in view of Robertson et al., US PGPUB No. 20020140698 A1, hereinafter Robertson.
Regarding claim 10, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 5, the virtual viewpoint object (Yoshimura; the virtual viewpoint object [as addressed within the parent claim(s)]).
Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto fails to disclose the virtual camera object is displayed semi-transparent.
Robertson teaches the virtual camera object is displayed semi-transparent (Robertson; the virtual camera object is displayed semi-transparent [¶ 0023 and ¶ 0049]).
Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto and Robertson are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the virtual viewpoint object is displayed semi-transparent (as taught by Robertson), in order to provide improved navigation techniques within virtualized environments (Robertson; [¶ 0002-0006]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Watanabe, US PGPUB No. 20150009216 A1, hereinafter Watanabe.
Regarding claim 15, Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto further discloses the display control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the projected point of gaze object of the point of gaze object (Yoshimura; the projected point of gaze object of the point of gaze object [as addressed within the parent claim(s)]).
Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto fails to disclose the projected point of gaze object is rendered as a shadow of the point of gaze object.
However, Watanabe teaches wherein the projected point of gaze object is rendered as a shadow of the point of gaze object (Watanabe; the projected point of gaze object (i.e. shadow map associated with a virtual camera) is rendered as a shadow of the point of gaze object (i.e. object associated with a virtual camera) [¶ 0032, ¶ 0036, and ¶ 0038-0040], as illustrated within Fig. 2; moreover, shadow map techniques [¶ 0034, ¶ 0041, and ¶ 0067]).
Yoshimura in view of Hanamoto and Watanabe are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Yoshimura as modified by Hanamoto, to incorporate the projected point of gaze object is rendered as a shadow of the point of gaze object (as taught by Watanabe), in order to provide realistic imaging within a virtual environment (Watanabe; [¶ 0004-0006 and ¶ 0031]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(regarding virtual camera, gazing point, and imaging direction)
Mizuta (US PGPUB No. 20130123962 A1);
Umemura (US PGPUB No. 20200014901 A1);
Yamamoto et al. (US PGPUB No. 20110118015 A1); and
Eto et al. (US PGPUB No. 20080102951 A1).
(regarding virtual camera associated with a viewpoint)
Tamaoki et al. (US PGPUB No. 20170076503 A1);
Odagiri et al. (US PGPUB No. 20170106285 A1); and
Sano et al. (US PGPUB No. 20240033634 A1).
(regarding a virtual viewpoint and focus target)
Yoshimura et al. (US PGPUB No. 20180096520 A1);
Fan et al. (US PGPUB No. 20230330532 A1);
Inokuchi et al. (US PGPUB No. 20090244064 A1);
Arai (US PGPUB No. 20200082603 A1);
Ogasawara (US PGPUB No. 20230033201 A1); and
Yamaoka (US PGPUB No. 20140354631 A1).
(regarding shadowing using a virtual camera)
Asami (US PGPUB No. 20100182315 A1);
Tanaka (US PGPUB No. 20090009515 A1);
Kadam (US PGPUB No. 20230063215 A1); and
Takahashi et al. (US PGPUB No. 20060221076 A1).
The subject matter of claim 15 comprises limitations that best embodies the sought after invention. Moreover, the narrower limitations of claim 15, resulted in applied prior art that is less broad than the teachings of Yoshimura et al. Therefore, it is suggested to the Applicant that further narrowing of the subject matter within the independent claims is required in order to overcome the teachings of Yoshimura et al.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of Reference Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charles Lloyd Beard whose telephone number is (571)272-5735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM, alternate Fridays 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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
CHARLES LLOYD. BEARD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2611
/CHARLES L BEARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
