Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because it depends from cancelled claim 5. For examination purposes, Claim 14 will be read as depending from Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, and 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “…wherein the first fastener and the second faster are both L-shaped locking members (line 10)…. and the holes on the first fastener and second fastener are locked and connected through the locking members (lines 12-13)” which indefinite because it is unclear if “the locking members” of lines 12-13 refers to the first and second fasteners/L-shaped locking members of line 10 (referred to in the Specification as first and second fasteners 2a, 2b as shown in Fig. 1 and also upper and lower limiting members 41, 42 as shown in Fig. 3), or if “the locking members” of lines 12-13 refers to the locking member 6 of Paragraph 0056 as shown in Fig. 7. Note that there is only one locking member 6 per group of first and second corresponding fasteners, not a plurality of locking members.
Claims 4, 9, and 10 recite the limitation “wherein the at least one group of slidably fitting components is two groups, and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces (line 3), the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (line 5), or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and further comprising at least one pulley, the at least one pulley is disposed on any one of the two surfaces, and the slidably fitting components and the at least one pulley are symmetrical with respect to the center line of the surface (lines 8-9).” The limitations “on the center line of the surface” and “with respect to the center line of the surface” is indefinite because it is unclear whether “the center line of the surface” refers to a specific one of the two surfaces, or if “the center line of the surface” refers to either one of the two surfaces.
Claims 2-4, and 6-20 are rejected for depending from, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, a rejected claim.
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 1-4 and 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marcolongo (U.S. Pat. No. 3552817) in view of Gunning (U.S. Pat. No. 5667287).
With respect to claim 1, Marcolongo discloses a quick-splicing structure for quick connection between two surfaces, comprising: at least one group of slidably fitting components (see annotated Fig. 5 below, flute 2 with rib 3), wherein the slidably fitting components comprise a first member (flute 2) and a second member (rib 3) that are slidably fitted and respectively disposed on the two surfaces (upper surface of box 1 with lower surface of a corresponding box); and a plurality of groups of locking components (see annotated Fig. 1 below, depressions 4 with projections 5), wherein the locking components comprise a first fastener (depression 4) and a second fastener (projection 5) that are fitted to be locked and respectively disposed on the two surfaces (upper surface of box 1 with lower surface of a corresponding box), and the plurality of groups of locking components (depressions 4 with projections 5) and the slidably fitting components (flute 2 with rib 3) are arranged in an alternating manner in a locking direction (depressions 4 with projections 5 are arranged on each side of flute 2/rib 3, locking the box from sliding in a longitudinal locking direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
901
742
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figs. 1 & 5
Marcolongo fails to disclose wherein the first fastener and the second fastener are both L-shaped locking members, the first fastener and the second fastener are provided with holes in the locking direction, and the holes on the first fastener and the second fastener are locked and connected through the locking members.
Gunning discloses a plurality of locking components (Fig. 1, columnar supports 82a-82d of a first container 50 and columnar supports 82a-82d of a second container 50’’ as shown in stacked configuration of Fig. 41) wherein comprise a first fastener and a second fastener wherein the first fastener (Fig. 1, see lower columnar support 82c of a first container 50) and the second fastener (upper columnar support 82c of corresponding second container 50’’ shown in Fig. 41) are both L-shaped locking members (Annotated Figs. 13 below show columnar supports 82 are L-shaped, having a vertically extending portion 114 and a horizontally extending portion 134), the first fastener and the second fastener are provided with holes in the locking direction (Figs. 40 and 41 show connected containers 50, 50’’ with columnar supports 82’, which have clip receptacles 146’ that extend through columnar supports 82’ in all 3 dimensions, including the longitudinal “locking direction”), and the holes (clip receptacles 146) on the first fastener and the second fastener are locked and connected via the locking members (Col. 9, lines 42-44, “the addition of a clip (not shown) positioned in the clip receptacles 146 of the columnar supports 82' to join vertically-aligned columnar supports 82' together”).
PNG
media_image2.png
798
653
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 13
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the boxes of Marcolongo by replacing the depression/projection locks with column supports and clips such as taught by Gunning with a reasonable expectation of success in order to easily and releasably secure the upper and lower boxes together while preventing boxes from becoming separated as the result of a sliding motion in a longitudinal direction, further securing the connection between the two boxes.
With respect to claim 2, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the at least one group of slidably fitting components (flute 2 with rib 3) is sliding-rail-type slidably fitting components (corresponding shapes of flute 2 and rib 3 allows them to slide relative to each other), and the at least one group of sliding-rail-type slidably fitting components (flute 2 with rib 3) is extended in the locking direction (flute 2 and rib 3 extend and slide along the longitudinal direction and lock in place via the columnar supports and clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 3, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the plurality of groups of locking components (Gunning, columnar supports 82a-82d of a first/upper box of Marcolongo and columnar supports 82a-82d of a second/lower box of Marcolongo) are dispersedly arranged in locking positions between the two surfaces (Gunning, Fig. 1, columnar supports 82a-82d are arranged with distance from one another), and two groups among the plurality of groups of locking components located in the locking direction are misaligned (see modified Fig. 1 below, first group of columnar supports 82a would not be aligned with second group of columnar supports 82d).
PNG
media_image3.png
586
768
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 1
With respect to claim 4, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the at least one group of slidably fitting components (flutes 2 with ribs 3) is two groups (see modified Fig. 5 below, box 1F), and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces (see modified Fig. 5 below, first and second groups of flute/rib are symmetrical with respect to the center line of box 1F), or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group (see modified Fig. below, box 1C), and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (single group of flute/rib located on the center line of box 1C).
Since the at least one group of slidably fitting components is two groups, and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces, or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (as explained in the claim 4 rejection above), the following limitation is not considered: or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and further comprising at least one pulley, the at least one pulley is disposed on any one of the two surfaces, and the slidably fitting components and the at least one pulley are symmetrical with respect to the center line of the surface.
PNG
media_image4.png
536
744
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 5
With respect to claim 6, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses a cabinet (Marcolongo, box of Fig. 1) comprising the quick-splicing structure according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above, flutes 2 with ribs 3 of Marcolongo modified to include columnar supports 82 and clips of Gunning), wherein the quick-splicing structure are disposed on multiple surfaces of a plurality of cabinets (Fig. 5, flutes/ribs and columnar supports/clips are disposed on vertical and horizontal surfaces of boxes 1A-1G), the plurality of cabinets are connected horizontally or vertically through the quick-splicing structure (Marcolongo, boxes 1A-1G are connected horizontally and vertically through flutes 2, ribs 3, and columnar supports/clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 7, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components vertically located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (flute 2 and rib 3 of the surfaces of box 1F and a corresponding box beneath box 1F) are configured as V-shaped sliding-rail fitting components (see modified Fig. 1 below, flute 2 of an upper box meets rib 3 of a corresponding lower box at a V-shaped connection point).
PNG
media_image5.png
424
841
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 1
With respect to claim 8, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components horizontally located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (Fig. 5, flute 2 and corresponding rib 3 on the sides of boxes 1A and 1B) are configured as dovetail sliding-rail fitting components (flute 2 and rib 3 are corresponding dovetail shapes).
With respect to claim 9 Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the at least one group of slidably fitting components (flutes 2 with ribs 3) is two groups (see modified Fig. 5 below, box 1F), and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces (see modified Fig. 5 below, first and second groups of flute/rib are symmetrical with respect to the center line of box 1F), or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group (see modified Fig. below, box 1C), and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (single group of flute/rib located on the center line of box 1C).
PNG
media_image4.png
536
744
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 5
Since the at least one group of slidably fitting components is two groups, and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces, or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (as explained in the claim 9 rejection above), the following limitation is not considered: or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and further comprising at least one pulley, the at least one pulley is disposed on any one of the two surfaces, and the slidably fitting components and the at least one pulley are symmetrical with respect to the center line of the surface.
With respect to claim 10, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the at least one group of slidably fitting components (flutes 2 with ribs 3) is two groups (see modified Fig. 5 below, box 1F), and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces (see modified Fig. 5 below, first and second groups of flute/rib are symmetrical with respect to the center line of box 1F), or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group (see modified Fig. below, box 1C), and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (single group of flute/rib located on the center line of box 1C).
PNG
media_image4.png
536
744
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 5
Since the at least one group of slidably fitting components is two groups, and the two groups of slidably fitting components are symmetrical with respect to center lines of the surfaces, or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and the one group of slidably fitting components is located on the center line of the surface (as explained in the claim 9 rejection above), the following limitation is not considered: or the at least one group of slidably fitting components is one group, and further comprising at least one pulley, the at least one pulley is disposed on any one of the two surfaces, and the slidably fitting components and the at least one pulley are symmetrical with respect to the center line of the surface.
With respect to claim 11, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses a cabinet (Marcolongo, box of Fig. 1) comprising the quick-splicing structure according to claim 2 (see claim 2 rejection above, flutes 2 with ribs 3 of Marcolongo modified to include columnar supports 82 and clips of Gunning), wherein the quick-splicing structure are disposed on multiple surfaces of a plurality of cabinets (Fig. 5, flutes/ribs and columnar supports/clips are disposed on vertical and horizontal surfaces of boxes 1A-1G), the plurality of cabinets are connected horizontally or vertically through the quick-splicing structure (Marcolongo, boxes 1A-1G are connected horizontally and vertically through flutes 2, ribs 3, and columnar supports/clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 12, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses a cabinet (Marcolongo, box of Fig. 1) comprising the quick-splicing structure according to claim 3 (see claim 3 rejection above, flutes 2 with ribs 3 of Marcolongo modified to include columnar supports 82 and clips of Gunning), wherein the quick-splicing structure are disposed on multiple surfaces of a plurality of cabinets (Fig. 5, flutes/ribs and columnar supports/clips are disposed on vertical and horizontal surfaces of boxes 1A-1G), the plurality of cabinets are connected horizontally or vertically through the quick-splicing structure (Marcolongo, boxes 1A-1G are connected horizontally and vertically through flutes 2, ribs 3, and columnar supports/clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 13, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses a cabinet (Marcolongo, box of Fig. 1) comprising the quick-splicing structure according to claim 4 (see claim 4 rejection above, flutes 2 and ribs 3 of Marcolongo modified to include columnar supports 82 and clips of Gunning), wherein the quick-splicing structure are disposed on multiple surfaces of a plurality of cabinets (Fig. 5, flutes/ribs and columnar supports/clips are disposed on vertical and horizontal surfaces of boxes 1A-1G), the plurality of cabinets are connected horizontally or vertically through the quick-splicing structure (Marcolongo, boxes 1A-1G are connected horizontally and vertically through flutes 2, ribs 3, and columnar supports/clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 14, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses a cabinet (Marcolongo, box of Fig. 1) comprising the quick-splicing structure according to claim 5 (see claim objection above, claim 14 is read as depending from claim 1) (see claim 1 rejection above, flutes 2 and ribs 3 of Marcolongo modified to include columnar supports 82 and clips of Gunning), wherein the quick-splicing structure are disposed on multiple surfaces of a plurality of cabinets (Fig. 5, flutes/ribs and columnar supports/clips are disposed on vertical and horizontal surfaces of boxes 1A-1G), the plurality of cabinets are connected horizontally or vertically through the quick-splicing structure (Marcolongo, boxes 1A-1G are connected horizontally and vertically through flutes 2, ribs 3, and columnar supports/clips of Gunning).
With respect to claim 15, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components vertically located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (flute 2 and rib 3 of the surfaces of box 1F and a corresponding box beneath box 1F) are configured as V-shaped sliding-rail fitting components (see modified Fig. 1 below, flute 2 of an upper box meets rib 3 of a corresponding lower box at a V-shaped connection point).
PNG
media_image5.png
424
841
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 1
With respect to claim 16, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components vertically located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (flute 2 and rib 3 of the surfaces of box 1F and a corresponding box beneath box 1F) are configured as V-shaped sliding-rail fitting components (see modified Fig. 1 below, flute 2 and rib 3 meet at a V-shaped connection point).
PNG
media_image5.png
424
841
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 1
With respect to claim 17, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components vertically located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (flute 2 and rib 3 of the surfaces of box 1F and a corresponding box beneath box 1F) are configured as V-shaped sliding-rail fitting components (see modified Fig. 1 below, flute 2 and rib 3 meet at a V-shaped connection point).
PNG
media_image5.png
424
841
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 1
With respect to claim 18, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components horizontally located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (Fig. 5, flute 2 and corresponding rib 3 on the sides of boxes 1A and 1B) are configured as dovetail sliding-rail fitting components (flute 2 and rib 3 are corresponding dovetail shapes).
With respect to claim 19, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components horizontally located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (Fig. 5, flute 2 and corresponding rib 3 on the sides of boxes 1A and 1B) are configured as dovetail sliding-rail fitting components (flute 2 and rib 3 are corresponding dovetail shapes).
With respect to claim 20, Marcolongo in view of Gunning discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Marcolongo) further discloses wherein the slidably fitting components horizontally located on two surfaces of the multiple surfaces (Fig. 5, flute 2 and corresponding rib 3 on the sides of boxes 1A and 1B) are configured as dovetail sliding-rail fitting components (flute 2 and rib 3 are corresponding dovetail shapes).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §102
Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitation of depending claim 5, overcoming the 102 rejection in view of Reznikov (U.S. Pat. No. 3552817). However, claim 1 and all its dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marcolongo (U.S. Pat. No. 3552817) in view of Gunning (U.S. Pat. No. 5667287) as mapped in the 103 rejection above.
Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitation of depending claim 5, overcoming the 102 rejection in view of Marcolongo (U.S. Pat. No. 3552817). However, Marcolongo in view of Gunning (U.S. Pat. No. 5667287) teaches the limitation of the amended claim 1 as explained in the Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 section below.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103
Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitation of depending claim 5, “wherein the first fastener and the second fastener are both L-shaped locking members, the first fastener and the second fastener are provided with holes in the locking direction, and the holes on the first fastener and the second fastener are locked and connected through the locking members”. Claim 5 has been cancelled.
Applicant argues that the first and second fasteners of Gunning (lower columnar support 82c of the first container 50 and upper columnar support 82c of the corresponding container 50) are not L-shaped. Applicant argues that each columnar support 82 is “a long strip”.
Although the columnar support 82 does have a vertical wall portion 114, it also has a horizontal wall portion extending from the vertical wall portion, forming an L-shape at the lower end of the first, upper container and forming an L-shape at the upper end of the second, lower container as shown in the annotated Figs. 13 below.
PNG
media_image2.png
798
653
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 13
The examiner notes that neither the language of the claim nor the specification of the instant application specifies any particular structure related to the “L-shaped locking members”. An “L-shape” is broadly interpreted to require both a vertically extending portion and a horizontally extending portion, but the term “L-shaped” does not preclude additional structure, such as another horizontally extending structure on an opposite end of the vertically extending structure, or an absence of material, such as an aperture.
Applicant further argues that the apertures 84 are vertical to the locking direction, not along the locking direction. The examiner notes that apertures 84 are not the holes referred to in the non-final rejection (11/12/2025). Apertures 84 are holes of the cabinet body, which allow columnar portions 82 to mate with the cabinet body. Clip apertures 146 are the “holes” of the first/second fasteners (columnar portions 82).
The examiner notes that neither the language of the claim nor the specification of the instant application specifies which direction is the “locking direction”. The locked configuration of Fig. 6 appears to lock the two cabinet bodies 1 in all directions including the x-axis and y-axis as shown in Fig. 1, as well as a z-axis (or side-to-side). Additionally, the specification recites “through the arrangement of the slidably fitting components and the locking components and the misalignment of the locking components and the slidably fitting components in the locking direction, the interference problem found in alignment is solved” (paragraph 0019) however the slidably fitting components, first member 1a and second member 1b, are shown sliding in both the X direction in Fig. 5 and the Y direction in Fig. 4. Additionally, paragraph 0009 states “the at least one group of slidably fitting components is sliding-rail-type slidably fitting components, and the at least one group of sliding-rail-type slidably fitting components is extended in the locking direction,” however, these components (1a and 1b) are 3-dimensional and therefore extend in x, y, and z directions.
For purposes of examination, the “locking direction” has been interpreted as a front-to-back direction, such as the X direction shown in Fig. 1. On page 19 of the Remarks, Applicant also designates the locking direction of the cabinet of Gunning as a similar front-to-back direction. Applicant also shows the opening direction of aperture 84 extending perpendicularly to the “locking direction”. However, the holes (clip receptacles 146) are 3-dimensional holes having a length, width and height, therefore the holes are provided in x, y, and z directions as shown in the annotated Fig. 39 below.
PNG
media_image6.png
743
1188
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 10 and 13
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH IRENE ARTALEJO whose telephone number is (571)272-4292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6.
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, Daniel Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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.
/E.I.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3637
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights