DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to application filed on June 26, 2024.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0035]: Language “In further examples, the electronic controller 210 may drive the outer socket 120 to rotate the nut 116 in a direction and the inner socket to rotate the alpine 118 in an opposite direction until the spline 118 is removed” should read “In further examples, the electronic controller 210 may drive the outer socket 120 to rotate the nut 116 in a direction and the inner socket to rotate the spline 118 in an opposite direction until the spline 118 is removed” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0038]: Language “In some embodiments, the configuration data can include one threshold to detect the shear or the removal of the spline 118 from the bolt 114 and to be used in the analysis of the current data to generate the shear indication ..” should read “In some embodiments, the configuration data can include one threshold to detect the shear or the removal of the spline 118 from the bolt 114 and to be used in the analysis of the current data to generate the shear indication .[[.]]” in order to correct minor informalities (e.g., remove additional period).
[0039]: Language “FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate current graphs 500A, 500B to analyze a shear based on one threshold ... In the embodiments, two thresholds (i.e., an entry current threshold 506, an exit current threshold 508) define the application time 510 to sample the current data to generate the shear indication … For examples, the electronic controller 210 may start sampling the current data …” should read “FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate current graphs 500A, 500B to analyze a shear based on two thresholds ... In the embodiments, two thresholds (i.e., an entry current threshold 506, an exit current threshold 508) define the application time [[510]]514 to sample the current data to generate the shear indication … For example, the electronic controller 210 may start sampling the current data …” in compliance with the details of Figs. 5A and 5B (e.g., these figures refer to the use of two thresholds and an application time 514) and to correct minor informalities.
[0040]: Language “For example, the electronic controller 210 can determine the second current change rate between a third current 614 at a first time 616 and a fourth current 618 at a fourth time 620 in the current data” should read “For example, the electronic controller 210 can determine the second current change rate between a third current 614 at a third time 616 and a fourth current 618 at a fourth time 620 in the current data” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0041]: Language “Thus, the electronic controller 210 may generates multiple samples for the application time” should read “Thus, the electronic controller 210 may generate multiple samples for the application time” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0042]: Language “Thus, the electronic controller 210 can estimate the bolt size or the socket size of the outer socket 120 when the effective current within a predetermined corresponding current range” should read “Thus, the electronic controller 210 can estimate the bolt size or the socket size of the outer socket 120 when the effective current is within a predetermined corresponding current range” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0043]: Language “IN some examples, the electronic controller 210 can obtain the identification indication of an outer socket 120 …” should read “[[IN]]In some examples, the electronic controller 210 can obtain the identification indication of an outer socket 120 …” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0046]: Language “Further, references to particular rotational or other movements (e.g., counterclockwise rotation) is generally intended as a description only of movement relative a reference frame of a particular example of illustration” should read “Further, references to particular rotational or other movements (e.g., counterclockwise rotation) [[is]]are generally intended as a description only of movement relative to a reference frame of a particular example of illustration” in order to correct minor informalities.
[0047]: Language “In some embodiments, including computerized implementations of methods according to the disclosure, can be implemented as a system, method, apparatus, or article of manufacture …” should read “Some embodiments, including computerized implementations of methods according to the disclosure, can be implemented as a system, method, apparatus, or article of manufacture …” in order to correct minor informalities.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “A shear wrench, comprising:” should read “A shear wrench[[,]] comprising:” in order to correct minor informalities.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “A method, comprising:” should read “A method[[,]] comprising:” in order to correct minor informalities.
Claim language “driving a motor of the power tool responsive to an actuation of the power tool” should read “driving a motor of [[the]]a power tool responsive to an actuation of the power tool” in order to provide appropriate antecedence basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “The computer-readable medium of claim …” should read “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim …” in order to provide appropriate antecedence basis for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “The computer-readable medium of claim …” should read “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim …” in order to provide appropriate antecedence basis for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “The computer-readable medium of claim …” should read “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim …” in order to provide appropriate antecedence basis for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language “The computer-readable medium of claim …” should read “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim …” in order to provide appropriate antecedence basis for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, the examiner submits that under Step 1 of the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence (see also 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance) for evaluating claims for eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the claim is to a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Continuing with the analysis, under Step 2A - Prong One of the test:
the limitation “generate a shear indication indicating detection of a shear based on analysis of the current data” is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, covers performance of the limitation using mental processes and/or mathematical concepts to evaluate data and obtain a result (i.e., a shear indication; see specification at [0019], [0031], [0037]-[0044]). Except for the recitation of the extra-solution activities (e.g., source/type of data being evaluated) and/or the particular technological environment or field of use, the limitation in the context of the claim mainly refers to performing a mental evaluation and/or applying mathematical concepts to analyze data and obtain a result.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception under Step 2A - Prong One of the test.
Furthermore, under Step 2A - Prong Two of the test, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application when considering the claim as a whole. In particular, the additional elements recited in the claim:
“A shear wrench, comprising:
a motor;
a current sensor configured to detect motor current; and
an electronic controller comprising a processor and a memory, the electronic controller configured to:
drive the motor in response to an actuation;
receive current data from the current sensor when the motor is driven in response to the actuation”
generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (e.g., power tool assessment, see specification at [0018]) (see MPEP 2106.05(h));
use a machine (e.g., a shear wrench comprising a motor, a current sensor configured to detect motor current, and an electronic controller; see also specification at [0022] regarding the invention being applied to any power tool) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) (see MPEP 2106.05(b));
add the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer (i.e., an electronic controller comprising a processor and a memory) as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f));
append a transformation (i.e., drive the motor in response to an actuation) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) (see MPEP 2106.05(c)); and
add extra-solution activities (e.g., mere data gathering, source/type of data to be manipulated) using elements recited at a high level of generality (i.e., receive current data from the current sensor when the motor is driven in response to the actuation) (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea when considering the claim as a whole. The claim is directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A of the test.
Additionally, under Step 2B of the test, the claim, when considered as a whole, does not include additional elements that, when considered individually and in combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements:
generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., power tool assessment, see specification at [0018]), which as indicated in the MPEP: “As explained by the Supreme Court, a claim directed to a judicial exception cannot be made eligible “simply by having the applicant acquiesce to limiting the reach of the patent for the formula to a particular technological use.” Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 192 n.14, 209 USPQ 1, 10 n. 14 (1981). Thus, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application” (see MPEP 2106.05(h));
append a machine (e.g., a shear wrench comprising a motor, a current sensor configured to detect motor current, and an electronic controller; see also specification at [0022] regarding the invention being applied to any power tool) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation), which as indicated in the MPEP: “Use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) would not integrate a judicial exception or provide significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(b));
append generic computer components (i.e., an electronic controller comprising a processor and a memory) used to facilitate the application of the abstract idea (i.e., mere computer implementation), which as indicated in the MPEP: “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not provide significantly more” (see MPEP 2106.05(f));
append a transformation (i.e., drive the motor in response to an actuation) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation), which as indicated in the MPEP: “A transformation that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) would not provide significantly more (or integrate a judicial exception into a practical application)” (see MPEP 2106.05(c)); and
add extra-solution activities (i.e., mere data gathering by selecting a particular data source/type to be manipulated) using elements recited at a high level of generality (i.e., receive current data from the current sensor when the motor is driven in response to the actuation), which as indicated in the MPEP: “Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more in Step 2B is whether the additional elements add more than insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. The term “extra-solution activity” can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. Extra-solution activity includes both pre-solution and post-solution activity. An example of pre-solution activity is a step of gathering data for use in a claimed process” (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The claim, when considered as a whole, does not provide significantly more under Step 2B of the test.
Based on the analysis, the claim is not patent eligible.
Similarly, independent claims 11 and 16 are directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea, Step 2A – Prong One) without integrating the judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A – Prong Two) and/or without providing significantly more (Step 2B) when considering the claimed invention as a whole as explained above with regards to claim 1.
With regards to the dependent claims, they are also directed to the non-statutory subject matter because:
they just extend the abstract idea of the independent claims by additional limitations (Claims 3, 5-7, 12-14 and 17-19), that under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, cover performance of the limitations using mental processes and/or mathematical concepts, and
the additional elements recited in the dependent claims, when considered individually and in combination, refer to extra-solution activities (e.g., mere data gathering using a data type or source), generic computer components/functions and/or field of use (Claims 2, 4-6, 8-10, 15 and 20), which as indicated in the Office’s guidance does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A – Prong Two) and/or does not provide significantly more (Step 2B) when considering the claimed invention as a whole.
Subject Matter Not Rejected Over Prior Art
Claims 1-20 are distinguished over the prior art of record for the following reasons:
Regarding claim 1.
Miyazaki (US 20080173139 A1) discloses/teaches:
A shear wrench (Fig. 1, item 1 – “power tool”; [0029]: a power tool (e.g., electric screwdriver) is disclosed (see current application specification at [0018]-[0019])), comprising:
a motor (Fig. 5, item 11 – ‘motor’; [0030]: power tool includes a motor for rotatably driving a driving unit (Fig. 1, item 24));
a sensor (Fig. 5, item 4 – “screw tightening completion detection unit”; [0033]: the power tool includes a screw tightening completion detection unit that employs sensors for detecting completion of screw tightening operations based on torque reaching a specific level (see [0031])); and
an electronic controller (Fig. 5, item 8 – “control circuit board”) comprising a processor and a memory ([0034], [0041], [0050]: the power tool includes a control circuit board comprising a CPU and storage for monitoring screw tightening operations (see also [0031], [0041], [0045])), the electronic controller configured to:
drive the motor in response to an actuation ([0031], [0042]: the motor drives the driving unit for applying torque to a driver bit for tightening a screw, when the torque reaches a specific level, a clutch mechanism in the driving unit is driven to disengage a mechanical connection between the motor and the driver bit);
receive data from the sensor when the motor is driven in response to the actuation ([0041]-[0043]: a shut-off signal, resulting from driving the clutch, is detected and transmitted from the screw tightening completion detection unit to the CPU in the control circuit board); and
generate an indication based on analysis of the data ([0043]: in response to the shut-off signal, a number of tightening operations is changed in a display portion of the power tool (see also [0037], [0051])).
Regarding “a current sensor configured to detect motor current; receive current data from the current sensor when the motor is driven in response to the actuation; and generate an indication based on analysis of the current data”, Dey (US 20200371498 A1) discloses:
“Each power tool device 102 may communicate power tool status, power tool operation statistics, power tool identification, stored power tool usage information, power tool maintenance data, and the like. Therefore, using the external device 108, a user can access stored power tool usage or power tool maintenance data. With this tool data, a user can determine how the power tool device 102 has been used, whether maintenance is recommended or has been performed in the past, and identify malfunctioning components or other reasons for certain performance issues” ([0030]: power tools (see [0034]-[0035]) communicate their status, operation statistics, tool usage information and other information to external devices, the information being obtained from sensors (e.g., current sensors; see [0037], [0040], [0041], [0043]; see also [0051] regarding importing information such as thresholds from external devices, and [0106] regarding user inputs about details of workpiece on which the power tool will operate)); and
“The impact detection with shutdown feature receives a user-specified number of impacts. During operation, upon a trigger pull, the controller 226 drives the motor 214 until the earlier of the user releasing the trigger 212 and the controller 226 detecting that the specified number of impacts occurred. The controller 226 may detect impacts as mentioned above, e.g., based on a change in acceleration or current, and may use an impact counter that the controller 226 increments upon each detected impact. Once the impact counter reaches the threshold indicated by the user, the controller 226 stops driving the motor 214. In preparation for the next operation, the impact counter may be reset when the user releases the trigger 212” ([0117]: impacts are detected based on a change in current).
The closest prior art of record, taken individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest (see italic text):
“generate a shear indication indicating detection of a shear based on analysis of the current data”
in combination with all other limitations within the claim, as claimed and defined by the applicant (the examiner submits that the closest prior art of record discloses generating reports about the usage of power tools based on torque or current, but the cited references do not teach or suggest generating a shear indication indicating detection of a shear from analysis of motor current data, as claimed by applicant).
Regarding claim 11.
Miyazaki (US 20080173139 A1) discloses/teaches:
A method ([0005]: monitoring screw tightening operations performed by a power tool (Fig. 1, item 1 – “power tool”) is presented (see current application specification at [0018]-[0019])), comprising:
driving a motor (Fig. 5, item 11 – ‘motor’) of the power tool (Fig. 1, item 1 – “power tool”) responsive to an actuation of the power tool ([0031], [0042]: a motor included in the power tool drives a driving unit (Fig. 1, item 24) for applying torque to a driver bit for tightening a screw, when the torque reaches a specific level, a clutch mechanism in the driving unit is driven to disengage a mechanical connection between the motor and the driver bit);
receiving data from a sensor of the power tool when the motor of the power tool is driven responsive to detecting the actuation of the power tool ([0041]-[0043]: a shut-off signal, resulting from driving the clutch, is detected and transmitted from the screw tightening completion detection unit to the CPU in the control circuit board);
analyzing the data from the sensor ([0043]: in response to the detection of the shut-off signal (analysis of data from the sensor), a number of tightening operations is changed in a display portion of the power tool (see also [0037], [0051])); and
generating an indication based on analysis of the data from the sensor ([0043]: in response to the shut-off signal, a number of tightening operations is changed in a display portion of the power tool (see also [0037], [0051])).
Regarding “receiving current data from a current sensor of the power tool when the motor of the power tool is driven responsive to detecting the actuation of the power tool; analyzing the current data from the current sensor; and generating an indication based on analysis of the current data from the current sensor”, Dey (US 20200371498 A1) discloses:
“Each power tool device 102 may communicate power tool status, power tool operation statistics, power tool identification, stored power tool usage information, power tool maintenance data, and the like. Therefore, using the external device 108, a user can access stored power tool usage or power tool maintenance data. With this tool data, a user can determine how the power tool device 102 has been used, whether maintenance is recommended or has been performed in the past, and identify malfunctioning components or other reasons for certain performance issues” ([0030]: power tools (see [0034]-[0035]) communicate their status, operation statistics, tool usage information and other information to external devices, the information being obtained from sensors (e.g., current sensors; see [0037], [0040], [0041], [0043]; see also [0051] regarding importing information such as thresholds from external devices, and [0106] regarding user inputs about details of workpiece on which the power tool will operate)); and
“The impact detection with shutdown feature receives a user-specified number of impacts. During operation, upon a trigger pull, the controller 226 drives the motor 214 until the earlier of the user releasing the trigger 212 and the controller 226 detecting that the specified number of impacts occurred. The controller 226 may detect impacts as mentioned above, e.g., based on a change in acceleration or current, and may use an impact counter that the controller 226 increments upon each detected impact. Once the impact counter reaches the threshold indicated by the user, the controller 226 stops driving the motor 214. In preparation for the next operation, the impact counter may be reset when the user releases the trigger 212” ([0117]: impacts are detected based on a change in current).
The closest prior art of record, taken individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest (see italic text):
“generating a shear indication indicating detection of a shear based on the analysis of the current data from the current sensor”
in combination with all other limitations within the claim, as claimed and defined by the applicant (the examiner submits that the closest prior art of record discloses generating reports about the usage of power tools based on torque or current, but the cited references do not teach or suggest generating a shear indication indicating detection of a shear from analysis of motor current data, as claimed by applicant).
Regarding claim 16.
Miyazaki (US 20080173139 A1) discloses/teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor (Fig. 5, item 8 – “control circuit board”; [0034], [0041], [0050]: a power tool (Fig. 1, item 1 – “power tool”) includes a control circuit board comprising a CPU and storage for monitoring screw tightening operations (see also [0031], [0041], [0045]))), cause the processor to:
drive a motor (Fig. 5, item 11 – ‘motor’) of a power tool (Fig. 1, item 1 – “power tool”) responsive to an actuation of the power tool ([0031], [0042]: a motor included in the power tool drives a driving unit (Fig. 1, item 24) for applying torque to a driver bit for tightening a screw, when the torque reaches a specific level, a clutch mechanism in the driving unit is driven to disengage a mechanical connection between the motor and the driver bit);
receive data from the sensor of the power tool when the motor of the power tool is driven responsive to detecting the actuation of the power tool ([0041]-[0043]: a shut-off signal, resulting from driving the clutch, is detected and transmitted from the screw tightening completion detection unit to the CPU in the control circuit board); and
generate an indication based on analysis of the data from the sensor ([0043]: in response to the shut-off signal, a number of tightening operations is changed in a display portion of the power tool (see also [0037], [0051])).
Regarding “receive current data from a current sensor of the power tool when the motor of the power tool is driven responsive to detecting the actuation of the power tool; and generate an indication based on analysis of the current data from the current sensor”, Dey (US 20200371498 A1) discloses:
“Each power tool device 102 may communicate power tool status, power tool operation statistics, power tool identification, stored power tool usage information, power tool maintenance data, and the like. Therefore, using the external device 108, a user can access stored power tool usage or power tool maintenance data. With this tool data, a user can determine how the power tool device 102 has been used, whether maintenance is recommended or has been performed in the past, and identify malfunctioning components or other reasons for certain performance issues” ([0030]: power tools (see [0034]-[0035]) communicate their status, operation statistics, tool usage information and other information to external devices, the information being obtained from sensors (e.g., current sensors; see [0037], [0040], [0041], [0043]; see also [0051] regarding importing information such as thresholds from external devices, and [0106] regarding user inputs about details of workpiece on which the power tool will operate)); and
“The impact detection with shutdown feature receives a user-specified number of impacts. During operation, upon a trigger pull, the controller 226 drives the motor 214 until the earlier of the user releasing the trigger 212 and the controller 226 detecting that the specified number of impacts occurred. The controller 226 may detect impacts as mentioned above, e.g., based on a change in acceleration or current, and may use an impact counter that the controller 226 increments upon each detected impact. Once the impact counter reaches the threshold indicated by the user, the controller 226 stops driving the motor 214. In preparation for the next operation, the impact counter may be reset when the user releases the trigger 212” ([0117]: impacts are detected based on a change in current).
The closest prior art of record, taken individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest (see italic text):
“generate a shear indication indicating detection of a shear based on analysis of the current data from the current sensor”
in combination with all other limitations within the claim, as claimed and defined by the applicant (the examiner submits that the closest prior art of record discloses generating reports about the usage of power tools based on torque or current, but the cited references do not teach or suggest generating a shear indication indicating detection of a shear from analysis of motor current data, as claimed by applicant).
Regarding claims 2-10, 12-15 and 17-20.
They are also distinguished over the prior art of record due to their dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Erbele; Simon et al., US 20220258315 A1, Method for Detecting Work Progress of a Handheld Power Tool
Reference discloses detecting work progress of a power tool based on comparison of a signal of an operating parameter of the electric motor of the tool against a model signal.
IDE TAKAMI, JP 2005125464 A, SCREW FASTENING FORGETFULNESS PREVENTIVE DEVICE OF SCREWDRIVER
Reference discloses a counter mechanism for counting screw fastening completion based on torque measurements.
KOMIYA TAKANORI, JP 2000108047 A, TORQUE WRENCH WITH COUNTING FUNCTION
Reference discloses a torque wrench with a counting mechanism based on torque measurements.
LAI, QING-HUA, CN 1640625 A, capable of counting display torque spanner
Reference discloses a torque wrench with a counting mechanism based on torque measurements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINA CORDERO whose telephone number is (571)272-9969. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, ANDREW SCHECHTER can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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.
/LINA CORDERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights