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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/04/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Response to Arguments
The amendments filed on 07/01/2026 with respect to claims 1, 7 and 14 have been considered and are made of record.
Applicant’s arguments/amendments filed 07/01/2026 with respect to the USC 103 rejection(s) of claim 1-18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection under USC 101 has been made.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed inventions are
directed to judicial exceptions (abstract ideas comprising mathematical concepts)
without significantly more.
The claims recite mathematical relationships and calculations for estimating and calibrating a state of charge (SOC), including integrating current, mathematically modeling voltage, generating and comparing SOC/open voltage relationships, calculating distances or costs, determining minimum error values, comparing calculated values with reference ranges, and mathematically adjusting an SOC value.
As to Claim 1
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 1 recites estimating an SOC based on an initial SOC value and an integral value of cell current; estimating a first open voltage through a model that simulates cell voltage; generating a first relationship graph representing a relationship between SOCs and corresponding open circuit voltages; calculating a plurality of relationship graphs by adjusting the first relationship graph according to respective preset error values; calculating respective summed values of distances between each relationship graph and the mapping data; determining a minimum value among the summed values; setting the minimum value as a final error value; determining whether the final error value falls within a predetermined reference range; and determining whether to calibrate the initial SOC value based on whether the final error value falls within the predetermined reference range.
These limitations recite mathematical relationships and mathematical calculations, including integration, mathematical modeling, generation and adjustment of mathematical relationships, calculation and summation of distances, determination of a minimum value, and numerical comparison. Accordingly, claim 1 recites an abstract idea in the mathematical concepts grouping.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The above identified mathematical concepts are not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements include the battery cell, storage, cell current information, and controller. The battery cell and cell current information provide the battery related data upon which the mathematical calculations are performed, the storage stores the data used in the calculations, and the controller implements the recited calculations.
The Specification at [0008] identifies accumulated errors associated with current integration SOC estimation, including an inaccurate initial SOC value, current sensor measurement error, and ADC error. The Specification further explains at [0013]-[0014] that the disclosed method may calibrate an error in SOC estimated by the current integration method without fully charging the battery. This asserted improvement has been considered.
However, claim 1 terminates in a determination of whether to calibrate the initial SOC value and does not require the calibration itself to be performed. Nor does claim 1 require the resulting determination to control charging or discharging, alter current supplied to or drawn from the battery cell, operate a relay, or otherwise control a physical operation of the battery system. The Specification separately describes at [0032] relay 30 as controlling the electrical connection between the battery system and an external device such that charging or discharging occurs when the relay is ON and the battery system is disconnected when the relay is OFF. Such battery control functionality is not required by claim 1.
Accordingly, considered individually and in combination, the additional elements use the battery system components as the source, storage, and computational implementation for the mathematical concepts, but do not integrate those concepts into a practical application.
Step 28: The additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the identified mathematical concepts. The Specification at [0005] describes current integration, or Coulomb counting, as estimating SOC by adding or subtracting an integral value of current during a charge or discharge cycle to/from an initial SOC value, and [0008] expressly characterizes the current integration method as a "common method" for estimating SOC in real time. The Specification at [0035] further states that cell voltage may be measured using "various well known methods" and describes measuring cell current using a current sensor.
The remaining graph generation, distance calculation, minimum error determination, and numerical comparison limitations constitute mathematical concepts identified in Step 2A rather than additional elements providing an inventive concept. Accordingly, considered individually and as an ordered combination, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the identified judicial exception.
As to Claim 2
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 2 further recites calculating an integral value by integrating cell current measured from an N1th storage period to an Nth storage period and adding the integral value to the SOC corresponding to the N1th storage period to calculate the SOC corresponding to the Nth storage period. These limitations expressly recite mathematical integration and addition and therefore further recite mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The requirement that the calculation use battery current information measured during a particular interval does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application. The measured current supplies numerical input to the calculation, and the resulting SOC is a calculated numerical value. The claim does not require the calculated SOC to control charging, discharging, current flow, or another physical operation of the battery.
Step 2B: The additional limitations do not amount to significantly more. The Specification at [0008] expressly identifies current integration as a "common method" for real time SOC estimation. Further [0041] describes integrating cell current for the storage duration and adding the integral value to the initial or prior SOC value to estimate the SOC corresponding to the subsequent storage period. The integration and addition themselves are part of the mathematical exception. Accordingly, claim 2 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 3
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 3 further recites storing a cell current profile and a first cell voltage profile and generating a second cell voltage profile corresponding to the cell current profile through a model including an open circuit voltage as a parameter based on an equivalent circuit of the battery cell. Generating a calculated voltage profile through an equivalent circuit model constitutes mathematical modeling and mathematical relationships and therefore recites mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The current and voltage profiles provide battery related data used by the model, and the equivalent circuit provides the mathematical model through which the second voltage profile is calculated. The claim does not require the generated voltage profile to control charging, discharging, current flow, or another physical battery operation. Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 2B: The additional limitations do not amount to significantly more. The Specification at [0043] describes the ECM as simulating cell voltage corresponding to cell current using an equivalent circuit of a battery cell and expressly states that the controller may generate cell voltage corresponding to cell current using "various types of well known ECMs." Thus, use of an ECM as the modeling mechanism does not itself provide an inventive concept, while generation of the second voltage profile through that model constitutes the mathematical modeling identified in Step 2A.
As to Claim 4
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 4 further recites calculating a magnitude of open circuit voltage when the first and second cell voltage profiles are fitted closest to each other. Fitting numerical profiles and determining the parameter corresponding to the closest fit constitute mathematical comparison, fitting, optimization, and calculation and therefore recite mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The voltage profiles are numerical representations of battery related information used in the fitting calculation. The resulting first open voltage is a calculated numerical parameter and is not required to control or otherwise change operation of the battery.
Accordingly, the limitation does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 2B: The Specification at [0043] expressly states that various types of "well known
ECMs" may be used. The Specification at [0045] describes fitting the first and second cell voltage profiles and deriving ECM parameters, including OCV, when the profiles are fitted close to one another. The fitting and optimization operations themselves constitute the identified mathematical concepts. Accordingly, the additional limitations do not provide significantly more.
As to Claim 5
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 5 further recites, when the final error value is outside the predetermined reference range, calibrating the initial SOC value by adding the SOC corresponding to the final error value to the initial SOC value. The claimed calibration therefore comprises mathematical addition and adjustment of numerical SOC values and recites a mathematical concept.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Although the limitation requires calibration, the claimed calibration is defined as adjustment of the numerical initial SOC value by adding another numerical SOC value. The claim does not require the calibrated SOC to control charging or discharging, alter battery current, operate relay 30, or otherwise control a physical battery operation.
Accordingly, the limitation does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 2B: The added calibration limitation consists of the mathematical addition identified in Step 2A and therefore forms part of the judicial exception itself rather than an additional element providing an inventive concept. The remaining battery system limitations provide the environment and data for performing the numerical calibration. Accordingly, claim 5 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 6
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 6 further recites dividing the SOC corresponding to the final error value by a preset time and adding the divided SOC to the initial SOC value in units of divided time. These limitations expressly recite mathematical division and addition.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Incrementally modifying the numerical initial SOC value over time does not require a corresponding change in battery charging, discharging, current flow, relay state, or another physical battery operation. Accordingly, the additional limitation does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 2B: The division and incremental addition limitations further define the mathematical SOC calibration process itself rather than supplying an additional inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 6 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 7
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 7 recites estimating an SOC based on an integral value of cell current; estimating a first open voltage through a model simulating cell voltage; estimating second open voltages based on an SOC open circuit voltage lookup table; calculating a final error corresponding to a degree of discrepancy between first and second open voltages using a predetermined cost function that quantifies their degree of matching; determining whether the final error falls within a predetermined reference range; and determining whether to calibrate an initial SOC value. These limitations recite mathematical integration, modeling, relationships, cost function calculation, discrepancy determination, and numerical comparison and therefore constitute mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The additional elements include the battery cell, storage, battery current information, and controller. These elements supply and store battery related data and implement the mathematical processing. Although the Specification at [0013]-[0014] describes calibration of current integration SOC error without fully charging the battery, claim 7 terminates in a determination of whether to calibrate the initial SOC and does not require the calibration to occur. The claim also does not require control of charging, discharging, current flow, relay 30, or another physical battery operation. Accordingly, the mathematical concepts are not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The Specification at [0008] expressly identifies current integration as a "common method" for real time SOC estimation, and [0035] states that battery cell voltage may be measured using "various well known methods." The cost function, discrepancy, and numerical comparison operations constitute the mathematical concepts themselves. Considered individually and as an ordered combination, the additional elements do not provide significantly more.
As to Claim 8
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 8 further recites determining an error value corresponding to the smallest cost among a plurality of costs derived through an equation corresponding to a cost function. The claim expressly defines the cost in terms of first open voltage, second open voltage, SOC, storage period count, reference number, and error value. These limitations expressly recite a mathematical equation, mathematical calculations, and determination of a numerical minimum and therefore recite mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The equation is applied to numerical values representing battery SOC and open circuit voltages. Applying the mathematical cost function to battery related data does not integrate the mathematical concept into a practical application because the claim does not require the resulting error value to control or physically alter battery operation.
Step 28: The cost function equation and determination of the smallest calculated cost constitute the identified mathematical exception itself rather than additional elements providing an inventive concept. The Specification describes the cost function determination as part of the mathematical matching/error process. Accordingly, claim 8 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 9
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 9 further recites integrating cell current measured between successive storage periods and adding the integral value to a preceding SOC value to calculate a subsequent SOC value. These limitations constitute mathematical integration and addition.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The measured cell current supplies input data to the mathematical calculation, while the resulting SOC is a calculated numerical value. The claim does not require use of the calculated SOC to physically control the battery.
Step 2B: The Specification at [000B] expressly characterizes current integration as a "common method," and [0041] describes integrating current over a storage interval and adding the result to a prior SOC value. The claimed integration and addition constitute the mathematical exception itself. Accordingly, claim 9 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 10
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 10 further recites generating a second cell voltage profile corresponding to a cell current profile through a model including an open circuit voltage parameter based on an equivalent circuit of the battery cell. This limitation constitutes mathematical modeling and calculation.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The cell current and cell voltage profiles provide battery related data to the model, and the output is another calculated voltage profile. The claim does not require the modeled voltage profile to control battery operation. Accordingly, the mathematical concepts are not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The Specification at [0043] expressly states that cell voltage corresponding to cell current may be generated using "various types of well known ECMs." The generation of the calculated profile constitutes the mathematical modeling identified in Step 2A. Accordingly, the additional limitations do not provide significantly more.
As to Claim 11
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 11 further recites calculating a magnitude of open circuit voltage when the first and second cell voltage profiles are fitted closest to each other. These limitations constitute mathematical fitting, comparison, optimization, and calculation.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The voltage profiles provide numerical battery information subjected to the fitting operation, and the resulting OCV is another calculated numerical parameter. The claim does not require the OCV to control a physical battery operation.
Step 2B: The Specification at (0043] expressly describes use of various types of "well known ECMs," while [0045] describes fitting the first and second cell voltage profiles to derive the OCV parameter. The fitting and closest match determination constitute the mathematical exception itself. Accordingly, claim 11 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 12
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 12 further recites calibrating the initial SOC value by adding the SOC corresponding to the final error value to the initial SOC value. This limitation constitutes mathematical addition and adjustment of numerical values. Step 2A, Prong 2: Although the limitation performs SOC calibration, the calibration changes a numerical SOC parameter and does not require the calibrated value to subsequently control charging, discharging, current flow, relay state, or another physical operation of the battery.
Accordingly, the mathematical concept is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The calibration by addition is itself part of the identified mathematical exception and therefore does not provide an additional inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 12 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 13
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 13 further recites dividing the SOC corresponding to the final error value by a preset time and adding the divided SOC to the initial SOC value in units of divided time. These limitations expressly recite mathematical division and addition.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Incremental numerical calibration of the SOC does not require corresponding physical modification or control of the battery. Accordingly, the limitation does not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 2B: The division and incremental addition further define the mathematical exception itself rather than providing an additional inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 13 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 14
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 14 recites estimating a state of charge (SOC) of a battery cell based on an initial SOC value and an integral value of cell current; estimating a first open voltage using a predetermined model that simulates cell voltage corresponding to the cell current; storing mapping data associating the estimated SOC and first open voltage; calculating a final error value corresponding to a degree of discrepancy between a plurality of first open voltages and a plurality of second open voltages obtained from an SOC open circuit voltage lookup table using a predetermined cost function that quantifies the degree of matching; determining whether the calculated final error value falls within a predetermined reference range; and, when the final error value is outside the reference range, calibrating the initial SOC value based on the final error determination.
These limitations recite mathematical concepts, including integration, mathematical modeling of voltage, mathematical relationships between SOC and open circuit voltage, calculation of a discrepancy using a cost function, comparison of calculated numerical values, and mathematical adjustment of an SOC value. Thus, claim 14 recites an abstract idea within the mathematical concepts grouping.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The additional elements include the battery cell, cell current information, and storage. These limitations provide the source and storage of battery related data upon which the recited mathematical operations are performed.
The asserted technological improvement described in the Specification has been considered. Specifically, the Specification explains that the current integration method is subject to accumulated error resulting from, for example, an inaccurate initial SOC value, current sensor measurement error, and ADC error, thereby decreasing SOC estimation accuracy as battery runtime increases [0008]. The Specification further explains that conventional correction may require periodically fully charging the battery and resetting the initial SOC to 100%, and identifies the disclosed objective as calibrating the initial SOC based on accumulated data without fully charging the battery [0009]-[0010].
However, claim 14 does not recite an additional technological mechanism that effects the asserted improvement apart from the identified mathematical processing. Rather, the claimed solution obtains battery current/voltage related data, mathematically estimates SOC and open voltage, mathematically determines a discrepancy using a cost function, compares the resulting numerical error with a reference range, and calibrates the numerical initial SOC value based on that mathematically determined error. The Specification confirms that the calibration itself may be accomplished by adding the SOC corresponding to the calculated final error to the initial SOC value, including by dividing the correction over a preset time and incrementally adding it to the initial SOC value [0081]-[0082].
Thus, although the claimed calculations are performed in the context of estimating the SOC of a battery cell and are intended to improve the accuracy of the SOC estimate, the claimed improvement is effectuated by the mathematical determination and correction of the SOC value itself. Claim 14 does not recite a separate technological implementation beyond those mathematical operations that applies the corrected SOC to control or otherwise change operation of the battery system. Accordingly, considering the claim as a whole and the asserted improvement described in the Specification, the additional elements do not integrate the mathematical concepts into a practical application.
Step 28: The additional elements, individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the identified mathematical concepts. The Specification expressly states that the current integration method is a "common method" for estimating SOC in real time [0008]. The Specification also describes the claimed battery related information as being obtained using ordinary battery monitoring components and techniques, while the claimed estimation, cost function analysis, comparison, and SOC correction constitute the mathematical concepts identified above.
Importantly, the particular cost function/error calculation and SOC calibration operations are not relied upon as well understood, routine, and conventional additional elements; rather, they form part of the identified mathematical exception itself. The additional battery related limitations merely provide the data and technological environment in which those mathematical operations are performed. Considered as an ordered combination, the claim uses battery data to perform the recited mathematical analysis and mathematically correct an SOC parameter, but does not add an inventive concept separate from the identified mathematical exception. Accordingly, claim 14 does not recite significantly more than the judicial exception.
As to Claim 15
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 15 further recites determining an error value corresponding to the smallest cost among a plurality of costs derived through an equation corresponding to the cost function . The equation operates on first open voltage, second open voltage, SOC, storage period count, reference number, and error values. The explicit equation, calculation of costs, and determination of a numerical minimum constitute mathematical formulas, calculations, and optimization and therefore recite mathematical concepts.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The cost equation is applied to numerical battery related values and determines another numerical value. The claim does not require application of the resulting error value to physically control battery operation. Accordingly, the mathematical concept is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The cost function equation and minimum cost determination constitute the identified mathematical exception itself and therefore do not provide an additional inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 15 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 16
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 16 further recites storing cell current and first cell voltage profiles, generating a second cell voltage profile through a model based on an equivalent circuit of the battery cell, and determining an open circuit voltage based on fitting the voltage profiles. These limitations constitute mathematical modeling, fitting, comparison, optimization, and numerical parameter determination.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The measured battery current and voltage information provide input to the mathematical model and fitting operation. The resulting open circuit voltage remains a calculated parameter and is not required to cause or control a physical battery operation. Accordingly, the mathematical concepts are not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The Specification at [0043] expressly states that the controller may generate cell voltage corresponding to cell current using "various types of well known ECMs." The Specification at [0045] describes fitting the measured and modeled cell voltage profiles to derive the ECM parameters, including OCV. The fitting and parameter determination operations constitute the mathematical exception itself. Accordingly, claim 16 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 17
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 17 further recites calibrating the initial SOC value by adding the SOC corresponding to the final error value to the initial SOC value. The limitation constitutes mathematical addition and numerical adjustment and therefore recites a mathematical concept.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The calibration changes the numerical SOC parameter but does not require subsequent use of the calibrated value to control charging, discharging, current flow, relay state, or another physical battery operation. Accordingly, the mathematical concept is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The added calibration operation constitutes the mathematical exception itself and therefore does not supply an additional inventive concept. Accordingly, claim 17 does not recite significantly more.
As to Claim 18
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 18 further recites dividing the SOC corresponding to the final error value by a preset time and adding the divided SOC to the initial SOC value in units of divided time. These limitations expressly recite mathematical division and addition.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Incrementally changing the numerical SOC value over time does not require the calibrated value to control charging or discharging, battery current, relay state, or another physical operation of the battery. Accordingly, the mathematical concepts are not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: The division and incremental addition limitations further define the mathematical exception itself rather than providing an additional inventive concept. Considered together with the limitations inherited from claim 14, the claim does not recite significantly more than the judicial exception.
Examiner’s Note:
Claims 1-18 stand rejected under 35 USC 101 as outlined above. No prior art rejection has been applied to these claims because the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fails to teach the following features recited in these claims. The cited prior art Kang (US Publication 20200341071) fails to teach or suggest the amended features of claim 1 requiring the controller to generate a first relationship graph between SOCs included in the mapping data and corresponding open circuit voltages based on an SOC open circuit voltage lookup table; calculate a plurality of relationship graphs by adjusting the first relationship graph by a respective plurality of preset error values; calculate, for each relationship graph, a respective summed value of distances between the relationship graph and the mapping data; set the minimum value among the plurality of summed values of distances as a final error value; and determine whether to calibrate the initial SOC value based on whether the final error value falls within the predetermined reference range.
Kang instead determines whether a calibration condition is satisfied based on threshold comparisons involving a reference voltage corresponding to a reference SOC, an estimated voltage, and adjacent estimated voltage values. Accordingly, Kang does not teach or suggest the amended graph adjustment and minimum summed distance determination recited in claim 1.
With respect to independent claims 7 and 14, which recite corresponding amended subject matter in system and method form, Kang fails to teach or suggest the amended features requiring calculating a final error value corresponding to a degree of discrepancy between a plurality of first open voltages and a plurality of second open voltages from an SOC open circuit voltage lookup table based on a predetermined cost function that quantifies a degree of matching between the plurality of first open voltages and the plurality of second open voltages, and determining whether to calibrate the initial SOC value based on whether the final error value falls within the predetermined reference range. Although Kang teaches an OCV SOC curve and calibration using estimated OCV values, Kang determines its calibration condition by comparing a reference voltage corresponding to a reference SOC with an estimated voltage and comparing adjacent estimated voltage values against respective thresholds. Kang does not teach or suggest the amended cost function determination that quantifies a degree of matching between the respective pluralities of first and second open voltages to obtain the claimed final error value. Accordingly, the amended features of independent claims 1, 7, and 14, in combination with the remaining limitations of the respective claims, are not taught or suggested by Kang.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang (US Publication 20200341071) discloses METHOD FOR CALIBRATING STATE OF CHARGE OF BATTERY AND BATTERY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAQI R NASIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1425. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/TAQI R NASIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
