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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant argues claim 4 is clear in light of the explanation in the specifications that states the corrective component of the DC bias voltage is an adjustment to the filtering component of the DC bias voltage. Examiner agrees it is clear in light of the specifications that the “corrective voltage” is applied to the T-bar electrodes by tuning the voltage to achieve a percent change from the nominal voltage. However, claim 4, as written remains unclear. The claim recites “wherein each of said DC corrective components is in a range of about -5% to about +5% of a respective DC filtering component.” There is only one voltage source connected to the auxiliary electrodes and there is therefore, no way to distinguish the corrective component from the filtering component. Consequently, it is unclear when infringement occurs.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § and 35 USC § 103
Regarding claims 1 and 14, applicant argues the amendments positively recite a DC voltage source and an RF voltage source. Examiner agrees these features are now positively recited.
Applicant also argues the misalignments of the rods/auxiliary electrodes and compensation for the misalignments by the DC corrective component must be considered part of the claimed apparatus. However, as amended, claim 1 recites “the DC corrective components provide a substantial compensation for misalignment of at least one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes relative to at least another one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes.” The “compensation for misalignment” further limits the function of the DC corrective component. The misalignment itself is not positively recited.
According to § 2114 (II), a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). As explained on the third page of the applicants’ remarks “the corrective component of the DC bias voltage is an adjustment to the filtering component of the DC bias voltage.” Hager teaches a controller configured to adjust the DC voltages applied to the auxiliary electrodes. Therefore, Hager discloses a DC corrective component configured to provide a substantial compensation for misalignment of at least one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes relative to at least another one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes. See rejection below.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4 recites “wherein each of said DC corrective components is in a range of about -5% to about +5% of a respective DC filtering component.” Figure 3 shows a DC voltage source connected to each auxiliary electrode, meaning that there is one voltage being applied to each electrode. It is not clear how one voltage can be split up into two components such that the DC corrective components is in a range of about -5% to about +5% of a respective DC filtering component. For the purposes of examination, claim 4 will be interpreted to mean the voltage applied to the auxiliary electrodes is variable.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hager.
Regarding claim 1, Hager teaches an ion filter for use in a mass spectrometer, comprising: a plurality of rods arranged in a multipole configuration to provide a passageway through which ions can travel (rods 130a, 130b),
at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes interspersed between said plurality of rods (auxiliary electrodes 140) (Fig. 15 below),
an RF voltage source (RF power supply 105) configured to apply RF voltages to said plurality of rods (As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary mass spectrometry system 100 can additionally include one or more power supplies (e.g., RF power supply 105 and DC power supply 107) that can be controlled by a controller 103 so as to apply electric potentials with RF, AC, and/or DC components to the quadrupole rods (para. [0056])) to provide an electromagnetic field within said passageway for providing radial confinement of the ions (Ion guides disclosed herein are generally operated at neutral gas pressures of about 2 to 20e-3 Torr and have radial confining RF frequencies of about 1 MHz and voltages of about 50 tO 1000 Vo-peak (para. [0074])),
and at least one DC voltage source configured to apply a DC voltage to said plurality of rods (As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary mass spectrometry system 100 can additionally include one or more power supplies (e.g., RF power supply 105 and DC power supply 107) that can be controlled by a controller 103 so as to apply electric potentials with RF, AC, and/or DC components to the quadrupole rods (para. [0056])) and apply a DC bias voltage to each of the at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes (As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary mass spectrometry system 100 can additionally include one or more power supplies (e.g., RF power supply 105 and DC power supply 107) that can be controlled by a controller 103 so as to apply electric potentials with RF, AC, and/or DC components to the quadrupole rods, the various lenses, and the auxiliary electrodes (para. [0056])),
wherein the DC bias voltage applied to each pair of auxiliary electrodes comprises a DC filtering component and a DC corrective component (the controller can be configured to adjust, control, or regulate the first and second auxiliary DC voltages that are applied to the auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage that is applied to the at least one rod of a quadrupole rod set so as to attenuate, cutoff, and/or filter at least a portion of ions that are transmitted from a multipole ion guide (para. [0018])),
The DC voltage applied to each pair of auxiliary electrodes is adjusted by the controller. Therefore, the DC bias voltage inherently comprises a filtering component and a corrective component.
wherein a polarity of a DC filtering component applied to one of said at least two pairs of [[the]] auxiliary electrodes is opposite to a polarity of a DC filtering component applied to the other pair another one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes (In some embodiments, the at least one power supply can be operable to provide a first DC voltage to a first pair of the auxiliary electrodes and a second DC voltage to a second pair of the auxiliary electrodes where the first and second DC voltages have the same amplitude and have opposite signs (para. [0016])),
and wherein the DC filtering components of the voltages applied to said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes are configured to provide stable trajectories for ions with m/z ratios in a target range and unstable trajectories for ions with m/z ratios outside said target range (As should be appreciated, taking the physical and electrical properties of Ql into account, parameters for an applied RF and DC voltage can be selected so that Ql establishes a transmission window of chosen m/z ratios, such that these ions can traverse Ql largely unperturbed. Ions having m/z ratios falling outside the window, however, do not attain stable trajectories within the quadrupole and can be prevented from traversing the quadrupole rod set Ql (para. [0061]))
and the DC corrective components provide a substantial compensation for misalignment of at least one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes relative to at least another one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes (For example, the controller can be configured to adjust the first and second auxiliary DC voltages that are applied to the auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage (para. [0018])).
As explained by the specifications, “the voltage differential between the voltages applied to the two poles of the auxiliary electrodes can be adjusted (e.g., via application of corrective voltages to those electrodes) so as to substantially compensate for mechanical misalignments and/or DC voltage imbalances.” In order for the DC corrective components to be configured to provide a substantial compensation for misalignments of the rods, the DC voltage on the auxiliary electrodes is adjusted. Therefore, the auxiliary electrodes in Hager are configured to configured to provide a substantial compensation for misalignment of at least one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes relative to at least another one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes because the DC voltage applied to each pair of auxiliary electrodes is adjusted by the controller.
PNG
media_image1.png
456
294
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said DC corrective components are configured to minimize trapping of the ions with m/z ratios in said target range within said passageway (In some embodiments, the DC voltages applied to the first and second auxiliary electrodes can have the same amplitude but opposite signs in order to attenuate (i.e., to reduce ion current), filter, and/or generate a cutoff of ions transmitted from the multipole ion guide (i.e., adjust a m/z range of ions transmitted from a multipole ion guide) (para. [0022])).
Regarding claim 4, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein each of said DC corrective components is in a range of about -5% to about +5% of a respective DC filtering component (the controller can be configured to adjust, control, or regulate the first and second auxiliary DC voltages that are applied to the auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage that is applied to the at least one rod of a quadrupole rod set so as to attenuate, cutoff, and/or filter at least a portion of ions that are transmitted from a multipole ion guide (para. [0018]))).
Regarding claim 5, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said RF voltages are configured to filter ions having m/z ratios less than a first m/z threshold (As should be appreciated, taking the physical and electrical properties of Ql into account, parameters for an applied RF and DC voltage can be selected so that Ql establishes a transmission window of chosen m/z ratios, such that these ions can traverse Ql largely unperturbed. Ions having m/z ratios falling outside the window, however, do not attain stable trajectories within the quadrupole and can be prevented from traversing the quadrupole rod set Ql (para. [0061])).
Regarding claim 6, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 5, wherein said DC bias voltages applied to the at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes and said voltage applied to said plurality of rods are configured to generate an electric field distribution within said passageway configured to cause filtering of ions having m/z ratios above a second threshold, thereby providing a bandpass ion filter allowing passage of ions with m/z ratios between said first and said second threshold (It will thus be appreciated that ion guides in accordance with various aspects of the present teachings can be operated …and/or as a bandpass filter (as in FIG. 5C) by adjusting the auxiliary DC signal (para. [0122])).
Regarding claim 7, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said auxiliary electrodes comprise a plurality of T-shaped electrodes (Fig. 2 as annotated below).
Regarding claim 8, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 7, wherein said T-shaped electrodes comprise a backplate and a stem extending radially from said backplate (Fig. 2 as annotated below).
PNG
media_image2.png
360
506
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said plurality of rods comprise four rods arranged in a quadrupole configuration (Fig. 2 as annotated below).
Regarding claim 10, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 9, wherein said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes comprises four auxiliary electrodes each of which is positioned between two of said plurality of rods (Fig. 2 as annotated below).
PNG
media_image3.png
363
659
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said RF voltages have a frequency in a range of about 0.1 MHz to about 5 MHz (In some embodiments, RF voltages can have a frequency in a range of about 0.3 MHz to about 2.5 MHz).
Regarding claim 12, Hager teaches the ion filter of Claim 11, wherein said RF voltages have an amplitude in a range of about 10 V to about 5 kV (V o.p) (In some embodiments, RF voltages can have an amplitude in a range of about 50 V to about 1000 V (para. [0017])).
Regarding claim 14, Hager teaches a mass spectrometer, comprising: an ion filter comprising: a plurality of rods arranged in a multipole configuration to provide a passageway through which ions can travel (rods 130a, 130b),
at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes interspersed between said plurality of rods (auxiliary electrodes 140) (Fig. 15 above),
an RF voltage source (RF power supply 105) configured to apply RF voltages to said plurality of rods (As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary mass spectrometry system 100 can additionally include one or more power supplies (e.g., RF power supply 105 and DC power supply 107) that can be controlled by a controller 103 so as to apply electric potentials with RF, AC, and/or DC components to the quadrupole rods (para. [0056])) to provide an electromagnetic field within said passageway for providing radial confinement of the ions (Ion guides disclosed herein are generally operated at neutral gas pressures of about 2 to 20e-3 Torr and have radial confining RF frequencies of about 1 MHz and voltages of about 50 tO 1000 Vo-peak (para. [0074])),
and at least one DC voltage source configured to apply a DC voltage to said plurality of rods (As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary mass spectrometry system 100 can additionally include one or more power supplies (e.g., RF power supply 105 and DC power supply 107) that can be controlled by a controller 103 so as to apply electric potentials with RF, AC, and/or DC components to the quadrupole rods (para. [0056])), and apply a DC bias voltage with one polarity to one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes and a DC bias voltage with an opposite polarity to another one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes (In some embodiments, the at least one power supply can be operable to provide a first DC voltage to a first pair of the auxiliary electrodes and a second DC voltage to a second pair of the auxiliary electrodes where the first and second DC voltages have the same amplitude and have opposite signs (para. [0016])) to provide a DC voltage difference between said auxiliary electrodes and said plurality of rods (For example, the controller can be configured to control the DC voltages applied to the first and second auxiliary electrodes so that these voltages differ from the DC offset voltage at which the quadrupole rod set is maintained (para. [0018])),
wherein the DC bias voltage with the one polarity and the DC bias voltage with the opposite polarity each comprise a DC filtering component and a DC corrective component (the controller can be configured to adjust, control, or regulate the first and second auxiliary DC voltages that are applied to the auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage that is applied to the at least one rod of a quadrupole rod set so as to attenuate, cutoff, and/or filter at least a portion of ions that are transmitted from a multipole ion guide (para. [0018])),
The DC voltage applied to each pair of auxiliary electrodes is adjusted by the controller. Therefore, the DC bias voltage inherently comprises a filtering component and a corrective component.
wherein the DC filtering components are configured to provide stable trajectories for ions with m/z ratios in a target range and unstable trajectories for ions with m/z ratios outside said target range (As should be appreciated, taking the physical and electrical properties of Ql into account, parameters for an applied RF and DC voltage can be selected so that Ql establishes a transmission window of chosen m/z ratios, such that these ions can traverse Ql largely unperturbed. Ions having m/z ratios falling outside the window, however, do not attain stable trajectories within the quadrupole and can be prevented from traversing the quadrupole rod set Ql (para. [0061]))
and the DC corrective components provide a substantial compensation for misalignment of at least one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes relative to at least another one of said plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes (For example, the controller can be configured to adjust the first and second auxiliary DC voltages that are applied to the auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage (para. [0018])).
According the specifications, misalignment is compensated for by tuning the voltage applied to the auxiliary electrodes. Hager discloses a controller configured to tune the voltage applied to the auxiliary electrodes. Therefore, Hager discloses a DC bias voltage with a component configured to provide substantial compensation for misalignment of the plurality of rods and said auxiliary electrodes.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hager as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Yoshinari Kiyomi (JP 06325731), hereinafter referred to as Kiyomi.
Regarding claim 3, Hager fails to explicitly teach wherein said misalignment comprises any of an axial and a radial misalignment.
However, Kiyomi teaches the ion filter of Claim 1, wherein said misalignment comprises any of an axial and a radial misalignment (Fig. 3 as annotated below).
PNG
media_image4.png
550
707
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device described in Hager to include the teachings of Kiyomi such that the misalignment comprises any of an axial and a radial misalignment. Kiyomi teaches “It is an object of the present invention to provide a quadrupole mass spectrometer capable of easily compensating, by an electric means at any time, a performance deterioration caused by an arrangement shape error held by the quadrupole mass spectrometer itself after as assembly, that is, a positional deviation of a rod electrode from an ideal electrode. It is another object of the present invention to provide a method of setting a shape error correction voltage for properly performing the compensation (para. [0004]).” Acknowledging both axial and radial misalignment is necessary to fully compensate for positional deviation of the rods.
Further, misalignment is not positively recited.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hager as applied to claim 12 above, and in further view of Jae C. Schwartz (US 20030183759), hereinafter referred to as Schwartz.
Regarding claim 13, Hager fails to explicitly teach teaches the ion filter of Claim 12, wherein said DC bias voltages applied to said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes have an amplitude in a range of about -8.5 kV to about +8.5 kV.
However, Schwartz teaches the ion filter of Claim 12, wherein said DC bias voltages applied to said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes have an amplitude in a range of about -8.5 kV to about +8.5 kV (These voltages include three separate DC voltages, DC1, DC2 and DC3, (typical range of 0 to +/-100 volts) applied to the electrodes of the front, center and back sections to produce the injection and axial trapping fields (para. [0007])).
Further, optimizing DC bias voltages applied to auxiliary electrodes is well within the bounds of normal experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 II (A). “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, “[a] particular parameter must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.” In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). In the case at hand, Hager teaches that “the present disclosure provides methods of adjusting, controlling, and/or regulating the first and second auxiliary DC voltages applied to first and second auxiliary electrodes relative to the DC offset voltage at which a quadrupole rod set is maintained in order to attenuate, filter, and/or generate a cutoff of ions transmitted from the multipole ion guide (para. [0021]).”. As such, Hager identifies DC bias voltages applied to the at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes as a variable which achieves a recognized result, i.e., setting a m/z ion cutoff. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to optimize DC bias voltages applied to auxiliary electrodes in Hager to meet the range of about -8.5 kV to about +8.5 kV since it is not inventive to dis-cover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hager in view of David G. Welkie (US 9613788 B2), hereinafter referred to as Welkie.
Regarding claim 17, Hager teaches the mass spectrometer of Claim 14, wherein said at least one DC voltage source comprises a first DC voltage source configured to apply said DC voltage to said plurality of rods (In some embodiments, a power supply can include at least one DC voltage source operable to apply a DC offset voltage to the quadrupole rod set (para. [0015])), and configured to apply said DC bias voltage with the one polarity and said DC bias voltage with the opposite polarity to said one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes and said other one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes, respectively (In some embodiments, the at least one power supply can be operable to provide a first DC voltage to a first pair of the auxiliary electrodes and a second DC voltage to a second pair of the auxiliary electrodes where the first and second DC voltages have the same amplitude and have opposite signs (para. [0016])).
Hager fails to teach a second DC voltage source configured to apply said DC bias voltage with the one polarity and said DC bias voltage with the opposite polarity to said one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes and said other one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes, respectively.
To be clear, Hager teaches at least one DC voltage source configured to apply a DC voltage to the plurality of rods and to apply DC bias voltage with the one polarity and said DC bias voltage with the opposite polarity to said one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes and said other one of said at least two pairs of auxiliary electrodes, respectively. However, Hager does not explicitly teach independent voltage sources for the rod electrodes and the auxiliary electrodes.
Welkie teaches an independent voltage source for the ion guide (A DC offset voltage generated by a DC voltage supply (not shown) is also provided to which the RF voltages are referenced in the conventional fashion (col. 20, lines 49-51)) as well as for the auxiliary electrodes (A DC voltage is applied to all of the auxiliary electrodes 421-424 from an auxiliary DC voltage generator (not shown) (col. 21, lines 18-20)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device described in Hager to include the teachings of Welkie by providing an independent voltage source for the rod electrodes as well as for the auxiliary electrodes. Doing so allows for independent control of the voltages applied to the rods as well as to the auxiliary electrodes.
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 MICA J. EINHORN whose telephone number is (571)272-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5pm.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at (571) 272-2293. 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.
/MICA JILLIAN EINHORN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights