DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments in the Pre-Appeal Brief filed 03/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive in part. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made herein.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 (and, similarly claims 5, 9, 11, 13-15, 17, and 19) is/are objected to because of the following informalities and should likely read as follows: “[...] wherein [[in ]]...” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities and should likely read as follows: “[...] wherein each respective flex valve further comprising a flex valve sleeve configured with a rigid portion adjoined with a flexible portion comprising a plurality of fingers.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “[...] the plugging device further comprising: a cone; and a lower sleeve proximate with the cone...”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim for the term “a cone”. For examination purposes, the Examiner will give its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the instant specification and will assume for it to correspond to the “cone” recited in the parent claim 16. Due to claim 17 being rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), the corresponding dependent claims are also rejected.
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, 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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell et al. (US Publication Number 2013/0168098 A1; herein “Campbell”) in view of Fripp et al. (US Publication Number 2020/0355054 A1; herein “Fripp”).
In regard to claim 1, Campbell discloses: A downhole system (as shown in figure 10) for multistage fracturing a subterranean formation (48 | see abstract, paragraphs [0002, 0037-0053], and figures 10-14), the downhole system comprising:
a first cluster of valves (e.g., at least two uppermost valves 10);
a second cluster of valves (e.g., at least two lowermost valves 10) downhole of the first cluster; and
a plugging device (22 — paragraphs [0031, 0036, 0039-0053] and figures 13-14), the plugging device comprising:
a plug body (23) having a distal end, a proximate end, and an outer surface (as shown in figures 13-14);
wherein the plugging device does not open any valves of the first cluster of valves, but opens at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0045-0053]), and
wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves comprises a respective frac valve (10) having a solid sleeve (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) configured with a profile surface (54 — at least paragraph [0044]), and
wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves has a number of flex valves in a range of at least one flex valve (10 — paragraphs [0048, 0053]) to no more than one hundred flex valves (Examiner notes in light of Examiner’s broadest reasonable interpterion in keeping with the instant specification, the valve 10 in Campbell is being treated as both a “frac valve” and “flex sleeve”, absent specific detail, as there is nothing that limits the claimed elements structurally and/or functionally distinguishing one from the other).
However, Campbell is silent in regard to: “[...] a workstring; and
a plugging device coupled with the workstring in a run-in configuration...”.
Nonetheless, Fripp teaches a similar type of downhole system where a sliding sleeve (132) needs to be actuated for fracturing purposes using a plugging device (136 — paragraphs [0030-0031, 0038] and figure 1), similar to that of Campbell. Fripp discloses using the plugging device (136) is pumped from the surface and conveyed by a workstring (e.g., “coiled tubing” — paragraphs [0021, 0030-0032, 0061]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the pumpable plugging device, as taught by Campbell, to include a workstring coupled to thereof in a run-in configuration, as taught by Fripp, to allow for combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results of conveying dart(s) wellbore (paragraph [0061] of Fripp). See MPEP 2143, section I, subsection A.
In regard to claim 2, Campbell further discloses: wherein another plugging device (i.e., different than the initial “plugging device” deployed) is used to open at least one valve of the first cluster of valves (paragraphs [0045-0053]).
In regard to claim 3, in view of the preceding modification, Campbell in view of Fripp further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device is unable to open any valves of the first cluster valves or the second cluster of valves (Examiner notes that the claim is broad in nature, as this is true for the time period in which run-in configuration the plugging device enters the wellbore to prior to entering the first, initial uphole valve).
In regard to claim 4, in view of the preceding modification, Fripp further discloses: the downhole system further comprising a setting tool (i.e., surface level tool(s) used to convey the “workstring”) coupled with the workstring, wherein the setting tool is operable to move the plugging device from the run-in configuration to a set configuration (see claim 1 rejection herein).
In regard to claim 8, Campbell further discloses: wherein each respective flex valve further comprising a flex valve sleeve (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) configured with a rigid portion adjoined with a flexible portion comprising a plurality of fingers (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12).
In regard to claim 11, Campbell discloses: A downhole system (as shown in figure 10) for multistage fracturing a subterranean formation (48 | see abstract, paragraphs [0002, 0037-0053], and figures 10-14), the downhole system comprising:
a first cluster of valves (e.g., at least two uppermost valves 10) arranged on a tubular in an initially closed position (paragraphs [0007-0008, 0041, 0044] and figure 12A);
a second cluster of valves (e.g., at least two lowermost valves 10) downhole of the first cluster, and also arranged on the tubular in a respective initially closed position (paragraphs [0007-0008, 0041, 0044] and figure 12A); and
a plugging device (22 — paragraphs [0031, 0036, 0039-0053] and figures 13-14), the plugging device comprising:
a cone (44, as shown in figures 13-14 — Examiner notes that the “cone” is commensurate to that as shown in figure 6A of the instant application); and
a lower sleeve (i.e., arbitrary unlabeled sleeve element(s), as shown in figure 14) proximate with the cone, wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device does not open any valves of the first cluster of valves, but in a set configuration the plugging device opens at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0045-0053]), wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves has a number of flex valves (10 — paragraphs [0048, 0053]) in a range of at least one flex valve to no more than one hundred flex valves, wherein each respective flex valve further comprising a flex valve sleeve (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) configured with a rigid portion adjoined with a flexible portion comprising a plurality of fingers (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12), and wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves comprises a respective frac valve (10) having a solid sleeve (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) configured with a profile surface (54 — at least paragraph [0044] | Examiner notes in light of Examiner’s broadest reasonable interpterion in keeping with the instant specification, the valve 10 in Campbell is being treated as both a “frac valve” and “flex sleeve”, absent specific detail, as there is nothing that limits the claimed elements structurally and/or functionally distinguishing one from the other).
However, Campbell is silent in regard to: “[...] a workstring comprising a setting tool; and
a plugging device operably coupled with the setting tool in a run-in configuration...”.
Nonetheless, Fripp teaches a similar type of downhole system where a sliding sleeve (132) needs to be actuated for fracturing purposes using a plugging device (136 — paragraphs [0030-0031, 0038] and figure 1), similar to that of Campbell. Fripp discloses using the plugging device (136) is pumped from the surface and conveyed by a workstring (e.g., “coiled tubing” — paragraphs [0021, 0030-0032, 0061]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the pumpable plugging device, as taught by Campbell, to include a workstring coupled to thereof in a run-in configuration, as taught by Fripp, to allow for combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results of conveying dart(s) wellbore (paragraph [0061] of Fripp). See MPEP 2143, section I, subsection A.
In regard to claim 12, Campbell further discloses: wherein another plugging device is used to open at least one valve of the first cluster of valves (paragraphs [0043, 0049, 0052]).
In regard to claim 13, Campbell further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device is unable to open any valves of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0045-0047, 0049-0053]).
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vinson et al. (US Publication Number 2016/0040492 A1; herein “Vinson”) in view of Campbell et al. (US Publication Number 2013/0168098 A1; herein “Campbell”).
In regard to claim 1, Vinson discloses: A downhole system (as shown in figures 3 and 8-11) for multistage fracturing a subterranean formation (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]), the downhole system comprising:
a workstring (35 — paragraph [0047]);
a first cluster of valves (e.g., at least two uppermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100);
a second cluster of valves (e.g., at least two lowermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100) downhole of the first cluster; and
a plugging device (50 — as detailed in figures 8) coupled with the workstring in a run-in configuration (as shown in figure 8A — see paragraphs [0070-0072]), the plugging device comprising:
a plug body (i.e., element(s) comprising 57) having a distal end, a proximate end, and an outer surface (as shown in figures 8);
wherein the plugging device does not open any valves of the first cluster of valves, but opens at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]),
wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves comprises a respective frac valve (110) having a solid sleeve (i.e., as shown in light of the cross-hatching of 110 in figures 8) configured with a profile surface (112 — paragraphs [0071-0073, 0077, 0082, 0084]).
However, Vinson is silent in regard to: wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves has a number of flex valves in a range of at least one flex valve to no more than one hundred flex valves. Examiner notes in light of Examiner’s broadest reasonable interpterion in keeping with the instant specification, the claimed “frac valve” and “flex sleeve” are both being treated as requiring the same structure, absent specific detail, as there is nothing that limits the claimed elements structurally and/or functionally distinguishing one from the other.
With that being said, Campbell teaches a similar type of multistage downhole fracturing system (abstract, paragraphs [0002, 0037-0053], and figures 10-14), similar to that of Vinson. Campbell teaches its sliding assembly (i.e., comprising sliding sleeve 20) to read on being both a “frac valve” and “flex sleeve”, absent specific detail, as it comprises a “solid sleeve” (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) and a flexible valve portion (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12). Figures 12A-12B show the open and close configuration of the valve assembly.
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the lower end of the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly, as taught by Vinson, to include for a flexible portion, as taught by Campbell, to allow for essentially locking the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly in the open position to prevent any premature actuation once open (paragraph [0048] of Campbell). Furthermore, the modification would allow for reusage of the valve assembly, if needed (paragraph [0053] of Campbell).
In regard to claim 2, Vinson further discloses: wherein another plugging device is used to open at least one valve of the first cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 3, Vinson further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device is unable to open any valves of the first cluster valves or the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 4, Vinson further discloses: the downhole system further comprising a setting tool (30) coupled with the workstring (paragraph [0047]), wherein the setting tool is operable to move the plugging device from the run-in configuration to a set configuration (i.e., as shown in the transitioning from figure 8A to figure 8B).
In regard to claim 5, Vinson further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the set configuration the plugging device is able to disconnect from the workstring, and also in the set configuration the plugging device is able to open at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (i.e., as shown in the transitioning from figure 8A to figure 8B).
In regard to claim 6, Vinson further discloses: wherein each valve of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves is initially in a respective closed position (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 7, Vinson further discloses: the plugging device further comprising: a cone (i.e., 52 which is commensurate to the slanted slope structure of the “cone” as detailed in the instant specification); and a lower sleeve (34) proximate with the cone (as shown in figures 8).
In regard to claim 8, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Campbell further discloses: wherein each respective flex valve further comprising a flex valve sleeve (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) configured with a rigid portion adjoined with a flexible portion comprising a plurality of fingers (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12).
In regard to claim 9, Vinson further discloses: the plugging device further comprising: a cone (i.e., 52 which is commensurate to the slanted slope structure of the “cone” as detailed in the instant specification); and a lower sleeve (34) proximate with the cone, wherein [[in ]]a run-in configuration (as shown in figure 8A) the cone is not engaged (i.e., functionally engaged) with the lower sleeve, but after moving the plugging device to a set configuration (as shown in figure 8B), the cone is engaged with the lower sleeve, and wherein [[in ]]the set configuration the plugging device remains free to move or be moved to engage a profile of any valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0057-0061, 0072]).
In regard to claim 10, Vinson further discloses: wherein at least one component of the plugging device comprises a shear feature (56), wherein at least one component of the plugging device is made of a dissolvable material (paragraph [0043]), and wherein the cone further comprises a ball seat (57) formed within an inner flowbore (paragraphs [0057-0061, 0072-0080]).
In regard to claim 11, Vinson discloses: A downhole system (as shown in figures 3 and 8-11) for multistage fracturing a subterranean formation (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]), the downhole system comprising:
a first cluster of valves (e.g., at least two uppermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100) arranged on a tubular (20) in an initially closed position (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]);
a second cluster of valves (e.g., at least two lowermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100) downhole of the first cluster, and also arranged on the tubular in a respective initially closed position (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]);
a workstring (35 — paragraph [0047]) comprising a setting tool (30 — paragraphs [0047-0053]); and
a plugging device (50 — as detailed in figures 8) operably coupled with the setting tool in a run-in configuration (as shown in figure 8A), the plugging device comprising:
a cone (i.e., 52 which is commensurate to the slanted slope structure of the “cone” as detailed in the instant specification); and
a lower sleeve (34) proximate with the cone (as shown in figure 8), wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device does not open any valves of the first cluster of valves, but in a set configuration the plugging device opens at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]), and wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves comprises a respective frac valve (110) having a solid sleeve (i.e., as shown in light of the cross-hatching of 110 in figures 8) configured with a profile surface (112 — paragraphs [0071-0073, 0077, 0082, 0084]).
However, Vinson is silent in regard to: wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves has a number of flex valves in a range of at least one flex valve to no more than one hundred flex valves, wherein each respective flex valve further comprising a flex valve sleeve configured with a rigid portion adjoined with a flexible portion comprising a plurality of fingers. Examiner notes in light of Examiner’s broadest reasonable interpterion in keeping with the instant specification, the claimed “frac valve” and “flex sleeve” are both being treated as requiring the same structure, absent specific detail, as there is nothing that limits the claimed elements structurally and/or functionally distinguishing one from the other.
With that being said, Campbell teaches a similar type of multistage downhole fracturing system (abstract, paragraphs [0002, 0037-0053], and figures 10-14), similar to that of Vinson. Campbell teaches its sliding assembly (i.e., comprising sliding sleeve 20) to read on being both a “frac valve” and “flex sleeve”, absent specific detail, as it comprises a “solid sleeve” (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) and a flexible valve portion (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12). Figures 12A-12B show the open and close configuration of the valve assembly.
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the lower end of the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly, as taught by Vinson, to include for a flexible portion, as taught by Campbell, to allow for essentially locking the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly in the open position to prevent any premature actuation once open (paragraph [0048] of Campbell). Furthermore, the modification would allow for reusage of the valve assembly, if needed (paragraph [0053] of Campbell).
In regard to claim 12, Vinson further discloses: wherein another plugging device is used to open at least one valve of the first cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 13, Vinson further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the run-in configuration the plugging device is unable to open any valves of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 14, Vinson further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the set configuration the plugging device is able to disconnect from the setting tool (i.e., as shown in the transitioning from figure 8A to figure 8B).
In regard to claim 15, Vinson further discloses: wherein [[in ]]the set configuration the plugging device is able to disconnect from the setting tool (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]).
In regard to claim 16, Vinson further discloses: wherein at least one component of the plugging device is made of a dissolvable material (paragraph [0043]).
In regard to claim 17, Vinson further discloses: the plugging device further comprising: a cone (i.e., 52 which is commensurate to the slanted slope structure of the “cone” as detailed in the instant specification); and a lower sleeve (34) proximate with the cone, wherein [[in ]]a run-in configuration (as shown in figure 8A) the cone is not engaged (i.e., functionally engaged) with the lower sleeve, but after moving the plugging device to a set configuration (as shown in figure 8B), the cone is engaged with the lower sleeve, and wherein [[in ]]the set configuration the plugging device remains free to move or be moved to engage a profile of any valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0057-0061, 0072]).
In regard to claim 18, Vinson further discloses: wherein at least one component of the plugging device comprises a shear feature (56), wherein at least one component of the plugging device is made of a dissolvable material (paragraph [0043]), and wherein the cone further comprises a ball seat (57) formed within an inner flowbore (paragraphs [0057-0061, 0072-0080]).
In regard to claim 19, Vinson discloses: A downhole system (as shown in figures 3 and 8-11) for multistage fracturing a subterranean formation (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]), the downhole system comprising:
a first cluster of valves (e.g., at least two uppermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100) arranged on a tubular () in an initially closed position;
a second cluster of valves (e.g., at least two lowermost valves of the arbitrary plurality of valves 100) downhole of the first cluster, and also arranged on the tubular in a respective initially closed position;
a workstring (35 — paragraph [0047]) comprising a setting tool (30 — paragraphs [0047-0053]); and
a plugging device (50 — as detailed in figures 8) operably coupled with the setting tool in a run-in configuration (as shown in figure 8A), the plugging device comprising:
a plug body (i.e., element(s) comprising 57) having a distal end, a proximate end, and an outer surface (as shown in figures 8);
wherein in the run-in configuration the plugging device does not open any valves of the first cluster of valves, but in a set configuration the plugging device is disconnected from the setting tool, and the plugging device opens at least one valve of the second cluster of valves (paragraphs [0032, 0037, 0047-0056, 0066-0084]), wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves comprises a respective frac valve (110) having a solid sleeve (i.e., as shown in light of the cross-hatching of 110 in figures 8) configured with a profile surface (112 — paragraphs [0071-0073, 0077, 0082, 0084]).
However, Vinson is silent in regard to: wherein each of the first cluster of valves and the second cluster of valves has a number of flex valves in a range of at least one flex valve to no more than one hundred flex valves. Examiner notes in light of Examiner’s broadest reasonable interpterion in keeping with the instant specification, the claimed “frac valve” and “flex sleeve” are both being treated as requiring the same structure, absent specific detail, as there is nothing that limits the claimed elements structurally and/or functionally distinguishing one from the other.
With that being said, Campbell teaches a similar type of multistage downhole fracturing system (abstract, paragraphs [0002, 0037-0053], and figures 10-14), similar to that of Vinson. Campbell teaches its sliding assembly (i.e., comprising sliding sleeve 20) to read on being both a “frac valve” and “flex sleeve”, absent specific detail, as it comprises a “solid sleeve” (i.e., upper solid, circumferential portion comprising 20) and a flexible valve portion (62 — paragraphs [0034, 0048, 0053] and figures 11-12). Figures 12A-12B show the open and close configuration of the valve assembly.
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the lower end of the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly, as taught by Vinson, to include for a flexible portion, as taught by Campbell, to allow for essentially locking the sliding sleeve of the valve assembly in the open position to prevent any premature actuation once open (paragraph [0048] of Campbell). Furthermore, the modification would allow for reusage of the valve assembly, if needed (paragraph [0053] of Campbell).
In regard to claim 20, Vinson further discloses: wherein the workstring is void of a perforating gun, and wherein another plugging device is used to open at least one valve of the first cluster of valves (paragraphs [0057-0061, 0072-0080]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL PATEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00AM-5:00PM CST.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/NEEL GIRISH PATEL/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights