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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 28-37 drawn to a pressure vessel in the reply filed on February 20, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 28-37 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed January 6, 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. There was no copy provided for DE 102017205190.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the specification does mention a “single strip,” as recited in claim 33.
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.
Claims 28-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 28 recites “the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions” in lines 8-10. It is unclear what is meant by “and the two domed portions” here. Does this mean “the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner… to the two domed portions”? Or “the first filament and second filament are interwoven at… the two dome domed portions”? Applicant’s figures appear to all show the interwoven structure being arranged on the cylindrical center portion of the liner, and not the two domed portions (see Figs. 1-3D).
Claim 32 recites “the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle” in lines 1-2 and “the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle” in lines 3-4. It is unclear whether the “first angle” and “second angle” are the same as the “first angle” and “second angle” recited in claim 28 at lines 5 and 6, respectively, or different angles.
Claim 33 recites “the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions” in lines 9-11. It is unclear what is meant by “and the two domed portions” here. Does this mean “the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner… to the two domed portions”? Or “the first filament and second filament are interwoven at… the two dome domed portions”? Applicant’s figures appear to all show the interwoven structure being arranged on the cylindrical center portion of the liner, and not the two domed portions (see Figs. 1-3D).
Claim 37 recites “the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle” in lines 1-2 and “the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle” in lines 3-4. It is unclear whether the “first angle” and “second angle” are the same as the “first angle” and “second angle” recited in claim 33 at lines 5 and 7, respectively, or different angles.
Claims 29-32 and 34-37 are also rejected through their dependence on a rejected parent claim (details above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 28-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2020/0224823 to Hatta (hereinafter, “Hatta”).
Regarding claim 28, Hatta discloses a pressure vessel (tank 10, Fig. 1) comprising: a liner (liner 11, Fig. 1) having a cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14, Fig. 1) and two domed portions (dome portions 15, 16, Fig. 1) and extending along a longitudinal axis (central axis CX, Figs. 1-4); and a structural shell (fiber-reinforced resin layer 12, Fig. 1) being disposed directly around the liner (liner 11, Fig. 1; para. [0021]), and comprising: a first filament (fiber bundle F1, Fig. 3) wound about the liner (liner 11) at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis (fiber bundle F1 is wound at a primarily hoop direction at an innermost portion, Fig. 3; para. [0038]); and a second filament (fiber bundle F2, Fig. 3) wound about the liner (liner 11) at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis (fiber bundle F2 is wound at a primarily helical direction at an innermost portion, Fig. 3; para. [0038]); wherein the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and second filament (fiber bundle F2) are interwoven (see Figs. 3-4) from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14) of the liner (liner 11) to an outer surface of the pressure vessel (outer surface of fiber-reinforced resin layer 12, see Fig. 1) directly around the cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14) and the two domed portions (dome portions 15, 16, see Figs. 1-3), and wherein neither the first angle (hoop direction) nor the second angle (helical direction) is parallel to the longitudinal axis (central axis CX, see Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 29, Hatta further discloses the first filament (fiber bundle F1) comprises a first material composition (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) comprises a second material composition (paras. [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 30, Hatta further discloses the first material composition (composition of fiber bundle F1) comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and provides higher strength (fiber bundle F1 is thicker, and thus has higher strength, see para. [0025]; Note – Applicant’s specification supports construing “material composition” as including the fiber configuration, see e.g., paras. [0016], [0028]-[0029]) and the second material composition (composition of fiber bundle F2) comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and provides lower strength (fiber bundle F2 is narrower, and thus has lower strength).
To the extent it could be argued that Hatta does not expressly disclose the first and second material compositions provide different strengths, an alternative rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is provided below.
Regarding claim 31, Hatta further discloses the interwoven first filament (fiber bundle F1) and second filament (fiber bundle F2) comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct (see e.g., Figs. 1, 3-4).
Regarding claim 32, Hatta further discloses the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) cross over each other at a first angle (angle between F1 and F2 in Fig. 3) in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct (see Fig. 3), and the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) cross over each other at a second angle (angle between F1 and F2 in Fig. 4) in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 33, Hatta discloses a pressure vessel (tank 10, Fig. 1) comprising: a liner having a cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14, Fig. 1) and two domed portions (dome portions 15, 16, Fig. 1) and extending along a longitudinal axis (central axis CX, Figs. 1-4); and a structural shell (fiber-reinforced resin layer 12, Fig. 1) being disposed directly around the liner (liner 11, Fig. 1; para. [0021]), and comprising: a first filament (fiber bundle F1, Fig. 3) applied onto the liner (liner 11) as a single strip (see Figs. 2-4) at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis (see e.g., Fig. 3); and a second filament (fiber bundle F2, Fig. 3) applied onto the liner (liner 11) as a single strip (see Figs. 2-4) at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis (see e.g., Fig. 3); wherein the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and second filament (fiber bundle F2) are interwoven (see Figs. 3-4) from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14) of the liner (liner 11) to an outer surface of the pressure vessel (outer surface of fiber-reinforced resin layer 12, see Fig. 1) directly around the cylindrical center portion (cylindrical body portion 14) and the two domed portions (dome portions 15, 16, see Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 34, Hatta further discloses the first filament (fiber bundle F1) comprises a first material composition (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) comprises a second material composition (paras. [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 35, Hatta further discloses the first material composition (composition of fiber bundle F1) comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and provides higher strength (fiber bundle F1 is thicker, and thus has higher strength, see para. [0025]; Note – Applicant’s specification supports construing “material composition” as including the fiber configuration, see e.g., paras. [0016], [0028]-[0029]) and the second material composition (composition of fiber bundle F2) comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and provides lower strength (fiber bundle F2 is narrower, and thus has lower strength).
To the extent it could be argued that Hatta does not expressly disclose the first and second material compositions provide different strengths, an alternative rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is provided below.
Regarding claim 36, Hatta further discloses the interwoven first filament (fiber bundle F1) and second filament (fiber bundle F2) comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct (see e.g., Figs. 1, 3-4).
Regarding claim 37, Hatta further discloses the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) cross over each other at a first angle (angle between F1 and F2 in Fig. 3) in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct (see Fig. 3), and the first filament (fiber bundle F1) and the second filament (fiber bundle F2) cross over each other at a second angle (angle between F1 and F2 in Fig. 4) in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct (see Fig. 4).
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.
Claims 30 and 35 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatta as applied to claims 29 and 34 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. 2017/0045181 to Watanabe et al. (hereinafter, “Watanabe”).
Regarding claim 30, Hatta further discloses the first material composition comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and the second material composition comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]).
To the extent Hatta does not expressly disclose the first material composition provides higher strength and the second material composition provides lower strength, this arrangement would be obvious.
Watanabe teaches a pressure vessel comprising a liner with a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and a structural shell disposed around the liner formed from filaments wound about the liner (Fig. 1). Watanabe teaches that the structural shell comprises a first filament having a first material composition comprising carbon (para. [0081]) and a second filament having a second material composition comprising carbon (para. [0081]). Watanabe teaches that the first material composition provides higher strength than the second material composition (para. [0081]). Watanabe teaches that having one of the material compositions provide lower strength may reduce material costs (para. [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Hatta to select the first material composition to have a higher strength than the second material composition as taught by Watanabe for the purpose of reducing material costs, as recognized by Watanabe (see para. [0075]), and because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 35, Hatta further discloses the first material composition comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]) and the second material composition comprises carbon (paras. [0024]-[0025]).
To the extent Hatta does not expressly disclose the first material composition provides higher strength and the second material composition provides lower strength, this arrangement would be obvious.
Watanabe teaches a pressure vessel comprising a liner with a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and a structural shell disposed around the liner formed from filaments wound about the liner (Fig. 1). Watanabe teaches that the structural shell comprises a first filament having a first material composition comprising carbon (para. [0081]) and a second filament having a second material composition comprising carbon (para. [0081]). Watanabe teaches that the first material composition provides higher strength than the second material composition (para. [0081]). Watanabe teaches that having one of the material compositions provide lower strength may reduce material costs (para. [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Hatta to select the first material composition to have a higher strength than the second material composition as taught by Watanabe for the purpose of reducing material costs, as recognized by Watanabe (see para. [0075]), and because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
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 28-37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,169,046 (“the ‘046 patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 2, and 5 of the ‘046 patent “anticipate” present claims 28-37, as shown below.
Present Claims
Claims of the ‘046 Patent
Claim 28: A pressure vessel comprising:
a liner having a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and extending along a longitudinal axis; and
a structural shell being disposed directly around the liner, and comprising:
a first filament wound about the liner at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis; and
a second filament wound about the liner at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis;
wherein the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions, and
wherein neither the first angle nor the second angle is parallel to the longitudinal axis.
Claim 1, col. 14, l. 29;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 30-31;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 32-33;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 34-35;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 36-37;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 38-46;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 34-37.
Claim 29: The pressure vessel of claim 28, wherein the first filament comprises a first material composition and the second filament comprises a second material composition.
Claim 2, col. 14, ll. 55-57.
Claim 30: The pressure vessel of claim 29, wherein the first material composition comprises carbon and provides higher strength and the second material composition comprises carbon and provides lower strength.
Claim 5, col. 14, ll. 62-65.
Claim 31: The pressure vessel of claim 28, wherein the interwoven first filament and second filament comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 38-40.
Claim 32: The pressure vessel of claim 31, wherein the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct, and the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 47-52.
Claim 33: A pressure vessel comprising:
a liner having a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and extending along a longitudinal axis; and
a structural shell being disposed directly around the liner, and comprising:
a first filament applied onto the liner as a single strip at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis; and
a second filament applied onto the liner as a single strip at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis;
wherein the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions.
Claim 1, col. 14, l. 29;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 30-31;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 32-33;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 34-35;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 36-37;
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 38-46.
Claim 34: The pressure vessel of claim 33, wherein the first filament comprises a first material composition and the second filament comprises a second material composition.
Claim 2, col. 14, ll. 55-57.
Claim 35: The pressure vessel of claim 34, wherein the first material composition comprises carbon and provides higher strength and the second material composition comprises carbon and provides lower strength.
Claim 5, col. 14, ll. 62-65.
Claim 36: The pressure vessel of claim 33, wherein the interwoven first filament and second filament comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 38-40.
Claim 37: The pressure vessel of claim 36, wherein the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct, and the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 1, col. 14, ll. 47-52.
Claims 28, 31-33, 36, and 37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,358,365 (“the ‘365 patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 9 of the ‘365 patent “anticipates” present claims 28, 31-33, 36, and 37, as shown below.
Present Claims
Claims of the ‘365 Patent
Claim 28: A pressure vessel comprising:
a liner having a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and extending along a longitudinal axis; and
a structural shell being disposed directly around the liner, and comprising:
a first filament wound about the liner at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis; and
a second filament wound about the liner at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis;
wherein the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions, and
wherein neither the first angle nor the second angle is parallel to the longitudinal axis.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 36;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 37-38;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 39-40;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 41-42;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 43-44;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55; Claim 9, col. 34, ll. 64-67;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 41-44.
Claim 31: The pressure vessel of claim 28, wherein the interwoven first filament and second filament comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55.
Claim 32: The pressure vessel of claim 31, wherein the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct, and the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55.
Claim 33: A pressure vessel comprising:
a liner having a cylindrical center portion and two domed portions and extending along a longitudinal axis; and
a structural shell being disposed directly around the liner, and comprising:
a first filament applied onto the liner as a single strip at a first angle relative to the longitudinal axis; and
a second filament applied onto the liner as a single strip at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis;
wherein the first filament and second filament are interwoven from an outer surface of the cylindrical center portion of the liner to an outer surface of the pressure vessel directly around the cylindrical center portion and the two domed portions.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 36;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 37-38;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 39-40;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 41-42;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 43-44;
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55; Claim 9, col. 34, ll. 64-67.
Claim 36: The pressure vessel of claim 33, wherein the interwoven first filament and second filament comprises a three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55.
Claim 37: The pressure vessel of claim 36, wherein the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a first angle in a first portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct, and the first filament and the second filament cross over each other at a second angle in a second portion of the three dimensional interwoven construct.
Claim 5, col. 34, ll. 45-55.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Pub. 2009/0314785 to Cronin et al. discloses a pressure vessel having a liner with a cylindrical portion and two dome portions, and a shell formed from interwoven filaments over the cylindrical portion and dome portions (see Figs. 1A-6).
U.S. Pub. 2005/0077643 to Matsuoka discloses a pressure vessel having a liner with a cylindrical portion and two dome portions, and a shell formed from first and second filaments arranged at different angles and interwoven over the cylindrical portion and dome portions (see Figs. 1-9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E. PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:30 pm EST.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/LAURA E. PARKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3733