The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-14) in the reply filed on December 8, 2025 is acknowledged. The election was made without traverse.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means”, “step”, or a generic placeholder but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “pipeline system” in Claims 8-14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oberhuber US 1,842,563 (hereafter Oberhuber).
Regarding Claim 1, Oberhuber anticipates:
1. A scraper pig (slug) for cleaning an interior wall of a tubular pipe (tube 25), the scraper pig comprising:
a main body (body of slug shown in Figure 1) with a conduit (opening shown in Figure 4 leading to spiral passages 23) extending therethrough, an interior surface of the conduit defining a conical inlet converging to a throat and a conical outlet diverging from the throat such that the conduit is venturi-shaped (shown in Figure 4);
one or more scraper heads (ribs 20); and
a plurality of turbine blades (blades formed in rifled walls causing rotation during fluid flow) disposed in the conical outlet about a longitudinal axis (unlabeled centerline of slug body shown in Figures 1-5) of the conduit, wherein the scraper pig configured such that:
when the pig is disposed within the pipe, the longitudinal axis of the conduit is parallel to and coincident with a longitudinal axis of the pipe (unlabeled centerline of pipe shown in Figure 6); and
as a fluid flowing in the pipe pushes the pig through the pipe, at least a portion of the fluid flows into the conduit and through the throat and thence across the plurality of turbine blades, thereby imparting rotation on the one or more scraper heads as the scraper heads scrape at least a portion of the interior wall of the pipe (“an internally rifled slug in order to make it rotate during its passage through a condenser tube by the reaction of the driving fluid”).
Regarding Claim 2, Oberhuber anticipates:
2. The scraper pig of claim 1, wherein the plurality of turbine blades (blades formed in rifled walls causing rotation during fluid flow) are affixed to the main body (body of slug shown in Figure 1) and the one or more scraper heads (ribs 20) are disposed on an outer surface of the main body (shown in Figures 1, 3, and 5), such that the imparting rotation to the one or more scraper heads comprises imparting rotation to the main body (slug is integrally formed resulting in rotation of cited elements).
Regarding Claim 8, Oberhuber anticipates:
8. A pipeline system comprising:
a tubular pipe (tube 25);
a fluid (fluid) flowing through the pipe; and
a scraper pig (slug) for cleaning an interior wall of the tubular pipe, the scraper pig comprising:
a main body (body of slug shown in Figure 1) with a conduit (opening shown in Figure 4 leading to spiral passages 23) extending therethrough, an interior surface of the conduit defining a conical inlet converging to a throat and a conical outlet diverging from the throat such that the conduit is venturi-shaped (shown in Figure 4);
one or more scraper heads (ribs 20); and
a plurality of turbine blades (blades formed in rifled walls causing rotation during fluid flow) disposed in the conical outlet about a longitudinal axis (unlabeled centerline of slug body shown in Figures 1-5) of the conduit, wherein the scraper pig configured such that:
when the pig is disposed within the pipe, the longitudinal axis of the conduit is parallel to and coincident with a longitudinal axis of the pipe (unlabeled centerline of pipe shown in Figure 6); and
as a fluid flowing in the pipe pushes the pig through the pipe, at least a portion of the fluid flows into the conduit and through the throat and thence across the plurality of turbine blades, thereby imparting rotation on the one or more scraper heads as the scraper heads scrape at least a portion of the interior wall of the pipe (“an internally rifled slug in order to make it rotate during its passage through a condenser tube by the reaction of the driving fluid”).
Regarding Claim 9, Oberhuber anticipates:
9. The pipeline system of claim 8, wherein the turbine blades (blades formed in rifled walls causing rotation during fluid flow) are affixed to the main body (body of slug shown in Figure 1) and the one or more scraper heads (ribs 20) are disposed on an outer surface of the main body (shown in Figures 1, 3, and 5), such that the imparting rotation to the one or more scraper heads comprises imparting rotation to the main body (slug is integrally formed resulting in rotation of cited elements).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen CN 210876625 U (hereafter Chen) in view of part rearrangement.
Regarding Claim 1, Chen teaches:
1. A scraper pig (pipe device and cleaning system) for cleaning an interior wall of a tubular pipe (pipe fitting 3), the scraper pig comprising:
a main body (propeller 1, Figure 1) with a conduit (flow passage 11) extending therethrough, an interior surface of the conduit defining a conical inlet (inlet end 14) converging to a throat (shrinking throat 13) and a conical outlet (outlet end 15) diverging from the throat such that the conduit is venturi-shaped (venturi tube structure, shown in Figure 3);
one or more scraper heads (cleaning head 2 with brushes 22); and
a plurality of turbine blades (propellers 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) disposed in the conical outlet (see discussion below) about a longitudinal axis (unlabeled rotating axis of rotation shaft 121 shown in Figure 3) of the conduit, wherein the scraper pig configured such that:
when the pig is disposed within the pipe, the longitudinal axis of the conduit is parallel to and coincident with a longitudinal axis of the pipe (shown in Figure 3); and
as a fluid flowing in the pipe pushes the pig through the pipe, at least a portion of the fluid flows into the conduit and through the throat and thence across the plurality of turbine blades (shown in Figure 3), thereby imparting rotation (through universal connector 4) on the one or more scraper heads as the scraper heads scrape at least a portion of the interior wall of the pipe (“wherein the propeller is provided with a flow passage, the flow passage can be rotationally equipped with a rotating mechanism, the output end of rotating mechanism passes through the over-current channel is located at one end of the sweeping direction, and connected with the cleaning head by a universal structure; when the fluid in the pipe fitting through the flow passage, the fluid can drive the rotating mechanism to rotate the rotating mechanism so as to drive the cleaning head cleaning pipe fitting inner wall. In this embodiment, the cleaning head can be a conventional brush head. It also can be rotation of the scraper with brush or scraper the crusts of pipe fitting inner wall scraping off”).
In Figure 3, Chen discloses a propeller body with a venturi shaped flow passage 11 formed by a conical inlet end 14 transitioning to shrinking throat 13 and a conical outlet end 15. Chen discloses four propellers 122 comprising a plurality of turbine blades located within the venturi shape flow passage causing them to rotate in response to fluid flow through the flow passage. Chen does not specifically show boundaries separating the inlet end, shrinking throat, and outlet end, however, it appears that Chen elected to locate one propeller in the inlet end and three propellers in the shrinking throat. It would have been obvious common knowledge to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the laws of fluid dynamics would allow the propellers to operate sufficiently if located in the inlet, outlet, or shrinking throat. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to slightly shift the location of the propellers slightly leftward from the location shown in Figure 3 creating a scenario where the propellers are located in an area defined as the outlet, with the motivation to allow the flow to fully develop uninterrupted in the inlet and shrinking throat and increase fluid velocity before impacting the propellers, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 3, Chen teaches:
3. The scraper pig of claim 1, wherein the plurality of turbine blades (propeller 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) comprises a first plurality of turbine blades and wherein the pig further comprises a second plurality of turbine blades (two propellers 122 – or one of the four propellers with multiple blades) disposed in the conical inlet (inlet end 14).
Regarding Claim 6, Chen teaches:
6. The scraper pig of claim 1, wherein:
the plurality of turbine blades (propeller 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) are affixed to a shaft (rotation shaft 121), an axis of which is parallel and coincident with the longitudinal axis (unlabeled rotating axis of rotation shaft 121 shown in Figure 3) of the conduit (inlet end 14); and
the one or more scraper heads (cleaning head 2 with brushes 22) are affixed to and extend from the shaft (through connection to cone 21), such that the turbine blades and the one or more scraper heads rotate with the shaft independently of the main body (propeller 1, Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 8, Chen teaches:
8. A pipeline system (shown in Figure 3) comprising:
a tubular pipe (pipe fitting 3);
a fluid flowing through the pipe; and
a scraper pig (pipe device and cleaning system) for cleaning an interior wall of the tubular pipe, the scraper pig comprising:
a main body (propeller 1, Figure 1) with a conduit (flow passage 11) extending therethrough, an interior surface of the conduit defining a conical inlet (inlet end 14) converging to a throat (shrinking throat 13) and a conical outlet (outlet end 15) diverging from the throat such that the conduit is venturi-shaped (venturi tube structure, shown in Figure 3);
one or more scraper heads (cleaning head 2 with brushes 22); and
a plurality of turbine blades (propellers 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) disposed in the conical outlet (see discussion below) about a longitudinal axis (unlabeled rotating axis of rotation shaft 121 shown in Figure 3) of the conduit, wherein the scraper pig configured such that:
when the pig is disposed within the pipe, the longitudinal axis of the conduit is parallel to and coincident with a longitudinal axis of the pipe (shown in Figure 3); and
as a fluid flowing in the pipe pushes the pig through the pipe, at least a portion of the fluid flows into the conduit and through the throat and thence across the plurality of turbine blades (shown in Figure 3), thereby imparting rotation (through universal connector 4) on the one or more scraper heads as the scraper heads scrape at least a portion of the interior wall of the pipe (“wherein the propeller is provided with a flow passage, the flow passage can be rotationally equipped with a rotating mechanism, the output end of rotating mechanism passes through the over-current channel is located at one end of the sweeping direction, and connected with the cleaning head by a universal structure; when the fluid in the pipe fitting through the flow passage, the fluid can drive the rotating mechanism to rotate the rotating mechanism so as to drive the cleaning head cleaning pipe fitting inner wall. In this embodiment, the cleaning head can be a conventional brush head. It also can be rotation of the scraper with brush or scraper the crusts of pipe fitting inner wall scraping off”).
In Figure 3, Chen discloses a propeller body with a venturi shaped flow passage 11 formed by a conical inlet end 14 transitioning to shrinking throat 13 and a conical outlet end 15. Chen discloses four propellers 122 comprising a plurality of turbine blades located within the venturi shape flow passage causing them to rotate in response to fluid flow through the flow passage. Chen does not specifically show boundaries separating the inlet end, shrinking throat, and outlet end, however, it appears that Chen elected to locate one propeller in the inlet end and three propellers in the shrinking throat. It would have been obvious common knowledge to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the laws of fluid dynamics would allow the propellers to operate sufficiently if located in the inlet, outlet, or shrinking throat. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to slightly shift the location of the propellers slightly leftward from the location shown in Figure 3 creating a scenario where the propellers are located in an area defined as the outlet, with the motivation to allow the flow to fully develop uninterrupted in the inlet and shrinking throat and increase fluid velocity before impacting the propellers, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 10, Chen teaches:
10. The pipeline system of claim 8, wherein the plurality of turbine blades (propeller 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) comprises a first plurality of turbine blades and wherein the pig further comprises a second plurality of turbine blades (two propellers 122 – or one of the four propellers with multiple blades) disposed in the conical inlet (inlet end 14).
Regarding Claim 13, Chen teaches:
13. The pipeline system of claim 8, wherein:
the plurality of turbine blades (propeller 122 – four shown in Figure 3, each comprising multiple blades) are affixed to a shaft (rotation shaft 121), an axis of which is parallel and coincident with the longitudinal axis (unlabeled rotating axis of rotation shaft 121 shown in Figure 3) of the conduit (inlet end 14); and
the one or more scraper heads (cleaning head 2 with brushes 22) are affixed to and extend from the shaft (through connection to cone 21), such that the turbine blades and the one or more scraper heads rotate with the shaft independently of the main body (propeller 1, Figure 1).
Claims 4, 5, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen CN 210876625 U (hereafter Chen) in view of part rearrangement and Frueh US 2016/0273992 (hereafter Frueh).
Regarding Claim 4, Chen teaches:
4. The scraper pig of claim 1, further comprising a scale thickness detection sensor (see discussion below).
Chen discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the inclusion of a scale thickness detection sensor. The reference Frueh discloses, in Paragraph [0024] a pipeline pig 10 that may include a scraping, brushing, cleaning module in addition to a sensor carrier module 18 configured with multiple sensors, such as electromagnetic acoustic transducers, Paragraph [0018] and [0033], that can determine the presence of cracks, corrosion, or other features such as scale thickness upstream of the cleaning module. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Chen device to include at least one sensor as taught by Frueh with the motivation to collect data regarding the pipe condition during operation allowing the user to determine if additional cleaning would be necessary.
Regarding Claim 5, Chen teaches:
5. The scraper pig of claim 4, wherein the scale thickness detection sensor (as taught by Frueh) comprises an electromagnetic sensor (electromagnetic acoustic transducers).
Regarding Claim 11, Chen teaches:
11. The pipeline system of claim 8, wherein the pig further comprising a scale thickness detection sensor (see discussion below).
Chen discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the inclusion of a scale thickness detection sensor. The reference Frueh discloses, in Paragraph [0024] a pipeline pig 10 that may include a scraping, brushing, cleaning module in addition to a sensor carrier module 18 configured with multiple sensors, such as electromagnetic acoustic transducers, Paragraph [0018] and [0033], that can determine the presence of cracks, corrosion, or other features such as scale thickness upstream of the cleaning module. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Chen device to include at least one sensor as taught by Frueh with the motivation to collect data regarding the pipe condition during operation allowing the user to determine if additional cleaning would be necessary.
Regarding Claim 12, Chen teaches:
12. The pipeline system of claim 11, wherein the scale thickness detection sensor (as taught by Frueh) comprises an electromagnetic sensor (electromagnetic acoustic transducers).
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen CN 210876625 U (hereafter Chen) in view of part rearrangement and Frueh US 2016/0273992 (hereafter Frueh) and Simpson et al. US 7,051,587 (hereafter Simpson et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Chen teaches:
7. The scraper pig of claim 6, further comprising a scale thickness detector affixed to the shaft such that the detector rotates with the shaft (see discussion below).
Chen discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the inclusion of a scale thickness detection sensor. The reference Frueh discloses, in Paragraph [0024] a pipeline pig 10 that may include a scraping, brushing, cleaning module in addition to a sensor carrier module 18 configured with multiple sensors, such as electromagnetic acoustic transducers, Paragraph [0018] and [0033], that can determine the presence of cracks, corrosion, or other features such as scale thickness upstream of the cleaning module. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Chen device to include at least one sensor as taught by Frueh with the motivation to collect data regarding the pipe condition during operation allowing the user to determine if additional cleaning would be necessary.
That being said, Frueh discloses multiple sensors allowing the perimeter of the pipe to be sensed. The reference Simpson et al. discloses the deployment of an inspection sensor mounted on a drive shaft allowing it to be rotated for inspection purposes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace multiple sensors of the combined Chen/Frueh device with a single or fewer sensors connected to a rotation shaft as taught by Simpson et al. with the motivation to reduce the numbers and therefore cost and complexity of a higher number of sensors.
Regarding Claim 7, Chen teaches:
14. The pipeline system of claim 13, wherein the scraper pig further comprises a scale thickness detector affixed to the shaft such that the detector rotates with the shaft(see discussion below).
Chen discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the inclusion of a scale thickness detection sensor. The reference Frueh discloses, in Paragraph [0024] a pipeline pig 10 that may include a scraping, brushing, cleaning module in addition to a sensor carrier module 18 configured with multiple sensors, such as electromagnetic acoustic transducers, Paragraph [0018] and [0033], that can determine the presence of cracks, corrosion, or other features such as scale thickness upstream of the cleaning module. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Chen device to include at least one sensor as taught by Frueh with the motivation to collect data regarding the pipe condition during operation allowing the user to determine if additional cleaning would be necessary.
That being said, Frueh discloses multiple sensors allowing the perimeter of the pipe to be sensed. The reference Simpson et al. discloses the deployment of an inspection sensor mounted on a drive shaft allowing it to be rotated for inspection purposes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace multiple sensors of the combined Chen/Frueh device with a single or fewer sensors connected to a rotation shaft as taught by Simpson et al. with the motivation to reduce the numbers and therefore cost and complexity of a higher number of sensors.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. Specifically, the prior art references include pertinent disclosures of pipe cleaning devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN KELLER can be reached on (571) 272-8548. 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.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723