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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of Application’s status as a continuation of US12,078,052.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 08/14/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-17 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-5, 7-13, 15-16, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. US12,078,052, hereinafter referred to as Parent Application. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the parent application reads upon the instant application, as detailed with a matching of limitation to limitation as shown below in a chart:
18/805,368
US12,078,052
Claim 1
Claim 1
1. A method to determine eccentricity of tubing within a borehole having casing, comprising:
1. A method to determine eccentricity of a tubing within a borehole, comprising:
transforming acoustic data to a time domain, wherein the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location;
collecting acoustic data from an acoustic system located within the borehole, wherein the acoustic data is collected at more than one azimuthal position at a borehole location;
generating transformed acoustic data by applying a fast Fourier transformation (FFT) filter to the acoustic data;
identifying, using the transformed acoustic data, a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time; and
calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data;
identifying a tubing arrival time using the central value and the transformed acoustic data, wherein the tubing arrival time relates to the acoustic data and the tubing;
determining a symmetry of axis for the transformed acoustic data;
calculating an eccentricity direction of the tubing using the symmetry of axis, and the transformed acoustic data;
identifying an earliest casing arrival time utilizing the transformed acoustic data;
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.
computing an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing utilizing the transformed acoustic data, received input parameters, the tubing arrival time, and the earliest casing arrival time, using the acoustic analyzer; and
Claim 2:
further comprising improving cement evaluation or mitigating wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole by replacing a section of the tubing or adjusting a position of the tubing based on the eccentricity magnitude.
performing a corrective action on the tubing based on the eccentricity magnitude, wherein the corrective action includes replacing a section of the tubing or adjusting a position of the tubing in order to improve cement evaluation, or prevent or reduce wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole
Claim 3
further comprising calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data and further using the central value for identifying the tubing arrival time.
calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data;
identifying a tubing arrival time using the central value and the transformed acoustic data, wherein the tubing arrival time relates to the acoustic data and the tubing;
Claim 4
Claim 4
wherein the central value is a mean value or a median value
wherein the central value is a mean value or a median value
Claim 5
Claim 5
further comprising flipping the transformed acoustic data and using the flipped acoustic data as the transformed acoustic data when identifying the earliest casing arrival time
flipping the transformed acoustic data after the calculating the eccentricity direction and prior to the identifying the earliest casing arrival time to generate a flipped acoustic data, and wherein the identifying utilizes the flipped acoustic data as the transformed acoustic data
Claim 6
Claim 7
wherein the dimensions of the tubing and casing include one or more of a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, or a casing thickness
wherein the input parameters are one or more of a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, a casing thickness, a characteristic of a subterranean formation, a type of transformations to apply, a filtering algorithm, or a distance between a transmitter of the acoustic system and a receiver of the acoustic system
Claim 7
Claim 8
further comprising removing, prior to the transforming, noise from the acoustic data using a machine learning algorithm
further comprising removing, prior to the applying the FFT filter, noise from the acoustic data using a machine learning algorithm.
Claim 8
Claim 9
A system, comprising:
A system, comprising:
an interface, capable of receiving acoustic data, wherein the acoustic data is collected downhole within a borehole at one or more locations along the borehole, wherein the borehole includes tubing and casing; and
a data transceiver, capable of receiving input parameters and collected acoustic data, wherein the acoustic data is collected downhole within a borehole at one or more locations along the borehole, wherein the borehole includes tubing located therein; and
one or more processors to perform operations, wherein the operations include:
an acoustic analyzer, capable of communicating with the data transceiver, applying one or more transformation algorithms to the acoustic data, generating transformed acoustic data by applying one or more filtering algorithms to the acoustic data, wherein the one or more filtering algorithms include a fast Fourier transformation (FFT) filter algorithm, calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data, identifying a tubing arrival time using the central value, determining a symmetry of axis of the transformed acoustic data, calculating an eccentricity direction of the tubing using the symmetry of axis, identifying an earliest casing arrival time, computing an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing utilizing the transformed acoustic data, the tubing arrival time, and the earliest casing arrival time, and initiating, based on the eccentricity magnitude, replacement of a section of the tubing or adjustment of a position of the tubing in order to improve cement evaluation, or prevent or reduce wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole.
transforming the acoustic data into a time domain,
identifying a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time using the transformed acoustic data, and
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.
Claim 9
Claim 10
an acoustic system, capable of collecting the acoustic data and communicating the acoustic data to the interface, wherein the acoustic system has at least one acoustic transmitter and at least one acoustic receiver separated by specified distance, and the acoustic system is located within the borehole.
an acoustic system, capable of collecting the acoustic data and communicating the acoustic data to the data transceiver, wherein the acoustic system has at least one acoustic transmitter and at least one acoustic receiver separated by specified distance, and the acoustic system is located downhole of the borehole.
Claim 10:
wherein the acoustic system is integrated with downhole tools and includes the interface and the one or more processors
Claim 11:
wherein the acoustic system includes the data transceiver and the acoustic analyzer
Claim 12:wherein the acoustic system is part of downhole tools
Claim 13:
wherein the acoustic analyzer and the data transceiver are part of a well site controller or a computing system.
Claim 11
wherein the operations further include calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data and further using the central value for identifying the tubing arrival time
See Claim 1 above
Claim 12
wherein the central value is a mean value or a median value
See Claim 4 above
Claim 13
wherein the operations further include flipping the transformed acoustic data and using the flipped acoustic data as the transformed acoustic data when identifying the earliest casing arrival time
See Claim 5 above
Claim 14
Claim 15
wherein the dimensions of the tubing and casing include one or more of a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, or a casing thickness
wherein the input parameters are one or more of a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, a casing thickness, a characteristic of a subterranean formation, a type of transformations to apply, a type of filtering to apply, or a distance between a transmitter of an acoustic system and a receiver of the acoustic system
Claim 15
wherein the operations further include initiating, based on the eccentricity magnitude, replacement of a section of the tubing or adjustment of a position of the tubing in order to improve cement evaluation, or prevent or reduce wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole
See Claim 1 above
Claim 16
Claim 16
A computer program product having a series of operating instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium that directs a data processing apparatus when executed thereby to perform operations to determine eccentricity of a tubing within a borehole, the operations comprising:
A computer program product having a series of operating instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium that directs a data processing apparatus when executed thereby to perform operations to determine eccentricity of a tubing within a borehole, the operations comprising:
transforming acoustic data to a time domain, wherein the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location;
collecting acoustic data from an acoustic system located within the borehole, wherein the acoustic data is collected at more than one azimuthal position at a borehole location;
generating transformed acoustic data by applying a fast Fourier transformation (FFT) filter to the acoustic data;
identifying, using the transformed acoustic data, a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time; and
calculating a central value of the transformed acoustic data;
identifying a tubing arrival time using the central value and the transformed acoustic data, wherein the tubing arrival time relates to the acoustic data and the tubing;
determining a symmetry of axis for the transformed acoustic data;
calculating an eccentricity direction of the tubing using the symmetry of axis, and the transformed acoustic data;
identifying an earliest casing arrival time utilizing the transformed acoustic data;
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing
computing an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing utilizing the transformed acoustic data, received input parameters, the tubing arrival time, and the earliest casing arrival time, using the acoustic analyzer; and
performing a corrective action on the tubing based on the eccentricity magnitude, wherein the corrective action includes replacing a section of the tubing or adjusting a position of the tubing in order to improve cement evaluation, or prevent or reduce wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole.
Claim 17
wherein the transforming is from a frequency domain to the time domain
generating transformed acoustic data by applying a fast Fourier transformation (FFT) filter to the acoustic data;
Claim 19
wherein the dimensions of the tubing and casing include a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, and a casing thickness
wherein the input parameters are one or more of a tubing diameter, a tubing thickness, a casing diameter, a casing thickness, a characteristic of a subterranean formation, a type of transformations to apply, a filtering algorithm, or a distance between a transmitter of the acoustic system and a receiver of the acoustic system.
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, 3-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. The claimed invention is directed to the abstract concept of performing abstract steps without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the following abstract concepts in BOLD of
1. A method to determine eccentricity of tubing within a borehole having casing, comprising:
transforming acoustic data to a time domain, wherein the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location;
identifying, using the transformed acoustic data, a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time; and
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.
8. A system, comprising:
an interface, capable of receiving acoustic data, wherein the acoustic data is collected downhole within a borehole at one or more locations along the borehole, wherein the borehole includes tubing and casing; and
one or more processors to perform operations, wherein the operations include:
transforming the acoustic data into a time domain,
identifying a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time using the transformed acoustic data, and
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.
16. A computer program product having a series of operating instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium that directs a data processing apparatus when executed thereby to perform operations to determine eccentricity of a tubing within a borehole, the operations comprising:
transforming acoustic data to a time domain, wherein the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location;
identifying, using the transformed acoustic data, a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time; and
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.
Under step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claims are considered to be in a statutory category.
Under Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitation the fall into/recite abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter that, when recited as such in a claim limitation, covers performing mathematics or mental steps.
Next, under Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because there is no improvement to another technology or technical field; improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; a particular machine; effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Examiner notes that since the claimed methods and system are not tied to a particular machine or apparatus, they do not represent an improvement to another technology or technical field. Similarly there are no other meaningful limitations linking the use to a particular technological environment. Finally, there is nothing in the claims that indicates an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself or transform a particular article to a new state.
Finally, under Step 2B, we consider whether the additional elements are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 1 contains no additional elements. Claim 8 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the collection of acoustic data by an interface is considered necessary data gathering. As recited in MPEP section 2106.05(g), necessary data gathering (i.e. collecting data) is considered extra solution activity in light of Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The additional limitation of Claim 8 of the borehole including tubing and casing is well understood, routine, and conventional in the art as evidenced by Lemarenko (US20220146702) in [0024] and Zerough (US6483777) in Figure 1. The additional limitation of Claim 8 of the processors and the additional limitations of Claim 16 of a computer program product with a processing apparatus are interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation to be a generic computer elements. Generic computer elements are not considered significantly more than the abstract idea and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As recited in the MPEP, 2106.05(b), merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2359-60, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1984 (2014). See also OIP Techs. v. Amazon.com, 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093-94. The additional limitation of Claim 9 of an acoustic system capable of collecting acoustic data and communicating acoustic data interface is considered necessary data gathering. As recited in MPEP section 2106.05(g), necessary data gathering (i.e. collecting data) is considered extra solution activity in light of Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Claims 2-7, 10-14, and 17-20 further limit the abstract ideas without integrating the abstract concept into a practical application or including additional limitations that can be considered significantly more than the abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 2 and 15 are not rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as the additional limitation of “improving cement evaluation or mitigating wear on the tubing or casing within the borehole by replacing a section of the tubing or adjusting a position of the tubing based on the eccentricity magnitude” is an additional limitation that integrates the judicial exception into a practical application.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-20 are not rejected under a prior art rejection (35 U.S.C. 102 or 35 U.S.C. 103).
In regards to Claims 1, 8, and 16, Lemarenko (US20220146702) teaches “the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location (“FIG. 2 is a perspective view of at least a portion of an example implementation of the phased array 139 according to one or more aspects of the present disclosure. Having a phased array downhole that includes transducers distributed azimuthally around the toolstring permits obtaining azimuthal measurements relative to the borehole 108 without rotation of the toolstring 104 , a module 136 of the toolstring 104 , and/or a sensor of one of the modules 136 .” – [0033]);
identifying, using the acoustic data, a casing arrival time (“ As shown in FIG. 4, the wavefront 212 is reflected at the casing 120 , thereby generating a specular reflection wavefront 220 . The specular reflection wavefront 220 excites a non-specular diffraction of acoustic waves at the interface between the casing 120 and the fluid in the casing (not shown). For example, as depicted in FIG. 5, which is an enlarged view of a portion of FIG. 4, guided waves 222 such as extensional (also designated S0) and flexural (also designated A0) Lamb waves are excited in the casing 120 , as well as surface waves 224 generated by the guided wave 222 at the interface between the fluid and the casing 120 . In particular, the extensional (S0) Lamb wave is generally the fastest to propagate in the casing 120 and to arrive at a transducer of the transducer module 138 . The flexural mode (A0) is another guided wave that is generally slower than the extensional Lamb wave, that arrives at a transducer during the arrival of the specular reflection, and that may also be detected using the recorded signals even if the specular echo may increase the difficulty of detection compared to the extensional mo” – [0038]; “As another example, the recorded data 820 may be indicative of the receipt, by at least two of the transducers, of the non-specular diffraction head wave 224 excited by the guided wave 222 that is excited by diffraction of the emitted acoustic signal 212 propagating in the casing 120, and determining 824 the at least one parameter may additionally comprise determining 828 a velocity (V.sub.guided of the guided wave 222 utilizing: [0076] a. from the recorded 820 data, arrival times of the head wave 224 at each of the transducers (e.g., the arrival times indicated by 310 in FIG. 11); and [0077] b. from the geometric parameters of the transducer module: [0078] i. azimuthal offsets of each transducer relative to: [0079] 1. each other one of the transducers; or [0080] 2. the at least one transducer from which the emitted acoustic signal was emitted 812; and [0081] ii. DOT.” – [0075]-[0081]); and
determining an eccentricity magnitude using the casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing (“In such implementations (among others also within the scope of the present disclosure), one of the acoustic waveforms indicated by the recorded 820 data may be a specular wave 220 resulting from the emitted 812 acoustic signal 212 reflecting from the inner surface of the casing 120 (e.g., the arrival times indicated by 304 in FIG. 11), the recorded 820 data may be indicative of the receipt of the specular wave 220 by at least three of the transducers, and the method 800 may further comprise determining 840 the eccentricity of the transducer module 138 within the casing 120 utilizing just: [0085] a. from the geometric parameters of the transducer module: [0086] i. DOT; and [0087] ii. azimuthal offsets of the at least three transducers; and [0088] b. from the recorded data, arrival times of the specular wave 220 at each of the at least three transducers” – [0084]-[0089]).
Zhao (US20100118648) teaches “the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location (“The method includes activating a transducer at least one azimuthal orientation in the borehole and generating an acoustic pulse” – [0005]); identifying, using the acoustic data, a casing arrival time (“receiving a signal comprising a plurality of events resulting from the generation of the acoustic pulse; bandpassing the received signal using a modulated Gaussian filter and providing a bandpassed signal; estimating an envelope of the bandpassed signal; and estimating from the envelope of the bandpassed signal an arrival time of each of the plurality of events, the arrival times being characteristic of a property of the casing, and/or a cement in an annulus between the casing and the formation” – [0005])
Lu (US20180010443) teaches in [0035] that the acoustic signals are analyzed in the time domain or they can be Fourier transformed into the frequency domain.
Leggett (US6084826) teaches on Column 1, Lines 20-35 that acoustic logs are measured in the time domain. Leggett further teaches in Column 6, Lines 13-30 the conversion from the time domain to other domains of interest.
Zeroug (US6483777) teaches on Column 3 Lines 55-67 and column 4 Lines 1-5 that the casing eccentricity is related to the propagation time of echoes.
Teague (US20200096668) teaches in [0021] and figure 5 that when rotating the source and detectors within the tool housing, the volume of the fluid surrounding the tool inside the production tubing can be treated as contiguous with the annular fluid such that any eccentricity of the tubing within the casing will manifest in a time-based elliptical function of the detectors.
Lemarenko, Zhao, Lu, Leggett, Zeroug, and Teague are silent with regards to the language of “transforming acoustic data to a time domain, wherein the acoustic data is collected from within the borehole from multiple azimuthal positions at a borehole location;
identifying, using the transformed acoustic data, a tubing arrival time and an earliest casing arrival time; and
determining an eccentricity magnitude of the tubing using the tubing arrival time, the earliest casing arrival time, and dimensions of the tubing and casing.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI whose telephone number is (571)272-3291. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:30 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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights