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 .
In the response to this Office action, the Office respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the Office in prosecuting this application.
The Office has cited particular figures, elements, paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider each of the cited references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage disclosed by the Office.
Status of Claims
- Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending in the application.
Priority
The application has claimed priority based on U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 63/376761 filed on September 22, 2022 and prior filed U.S. Application Serial No. 18472193 (now U.S. Patent No. 1236569) filed on September 21, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 7, 2025 and July 22, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Timing mechanism (claim 15)
Paragraphs 0121-0123 “timing mechanism that transfers motion in a coordinated manner” such as “linkage arms 2608 in FIG. 27 also movably connect portions of the connection 2702 to provide such a timing mechanism that transfers motion in a coordinated manner”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saito, U.S. Patent Publication No. 2002008677.
Consider claim 1, Saito teaches a wearable electronic device, comprising: a display (see Saito figure 1, element 1 display part, figure 15, element 1 display part);
a facial interface (see Saito figure 1, figure 9, figure 15 and figure 16 where when head-mounted display is worn by user the portions of the device closest to a user’s face correspond to a facial interface);
an angular adjustment connection between the display and the facial interface (see Saito figure 14, elements 31, 31a, 30a, 34 and paragraphs 0075-0078 where when the left and right frames 30 are turned about the rotational axes of the shafts 31a, the left and right frames 30, 30 are always turned by an equal angle, because the gears 31a, 31a are in mesh with each other. Namely, the frames 30, 30 rotationally move in symmetry relative to the display part 1. When the frames 30 touch the temporal regions, the display part 1 always faces right front accordingly and figure 15, element 50a, 53, 52, 51, 50 and paragraphs 0082-0088 where display part 1 is attached to the frame 50 so as to be rotatable about a rotational axis 50a. A constant frictional force is given between the rotational axis 50a and the display part 1 so that the display part 1 can be fixed at any rotational position); and
a linear adjustment connection between the display and the facial interface (see Saito figure 1, element 10, 11 detail in figure 2), the linear adjustment connection comprising: a first connection (see Saito figure 2, element 11a); and
a second connection joined to the first connection (see Saito figure 2, element 11c and paragraph 0088 where In the present embodiment it was described that the adjustment of the observation distance was implemented by rotating the display part 1 about the rotational axis of the shaft 50a, but it can also be contemplated that the frontal pressing pad 54 is arranged movable relative to the display part 1 and the observation distance is adjusted by changing the distance between the frontal pressing pad 54 and the display part, as described referring to FIG. 2 in the first embodiment).
Consider claim 2, Saito teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the angular adjustment connection comprises a linkage positioned at a forehead region (see Saito figure 14, elements 31, 31a, 30a, 34 and paragraphs 0075-0078 where When the left and right frames 30 are turned about the rotational axes of the shafts 31a, the left and right frames 30, 30 are always turned by an equal angle, because the gears 31a, 31a are in mesh with each other. Namely, the frames 30, 30 rotationally move in symmetry relative to the display part 1. When the frames 30 touch the temporal regions, the display part 1 always faces right front accordingly and figure 15, element 50a, 53, 52, 51, 50 and paragraphs 0082-0088 where display part 1 is attached to the frame 50 so as to be rotatable about a rotational axis 50a. A constant frictional force is given between the rotational axis 50a and the display part 1 so that the display part 1 can be fixed at any rotational position).
Consider claim 4, Saito teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the angular adjustment connection (see Saito figure 14, elements 31, 31a, 30a, 34 and paragraphs 0075-0078 where when the left and right frames 30 are turned about the rotational axes of the shafts 31a, the left and right frames 30, 30 are always turned by an equal angle, because the gears 31a, 31a are in mesh with each other. Namely, the frames 30, 30 rotationally move in symmetry relative to the display part 1. When the frames 30 touch the temporal regions, the display part 1 always faces right front accordingly and figure 15, element 50a, 53, 52, 51, 50 and paragraphs 0082-0088 where display part 1 is attached to the frame 50 so as to be rotatable about a rotational axis 50a. A constant frictional force is given between the rotational axis 50a and the display part 1 so that the display part 1 can be fixed at any rotational position where for figure 14, elements 30 may correspond to adjustable pillars and for figure 15, element 50, 53, 51, 52, 50a which extends across a user’s head may correspond to an adjustable pillar) and the linear adjustment connection comprise adjustable pillars (see Saito figure 2, elements 11a, 11c corresponding to adjustable pillars).
Consider claim 6, Saito teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches further comprising a timing mechanism mechanically joining the first connection and the second connection (see (see Saito figure 2, element 11a, 11c and paragraphs 0038-0041 specifically for example paragraph 0040 where for moving the pad 10 back (away), the pair of cantilever beams 11c are bent inward (toward the long slot 11a), for example, by remote control from the support 1a and then the pad 10 is pushed forward in a state in which the claws lid are disengaged from the faces 12b of the guide member 12. Notice that due to structure in figure 2, first connection 11a would move at a same timing as connection 11c).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 7-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20020008677 in view of Jo et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20200081259.
Consider claim 3 Saito teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first connection is positioned at a forehead region (see Saito figure 1, element 10, 11 detail in figure 2 and figure 2, element 11a). Saito is silent regarding wherein the second connection is positioned at a zygoma region or a maxilla region.
In the same field of endeavor, Jo teaches a first connection positioned at a forehead region and a second connection positioned at a zygoma region or a maxilla region (see Jo figure 6, element 34A, 34B, 34C and paragraphs 0045-0049) so as to appropriately position display modules regardless of prominence of a user’s forehead. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have modified Saito with the teachings of Jo to have a first connection positioned at a forehead region and a second connection positioned at a zygoma region or a maxilla region so as to appropriately position display modules regardless of prominence of a user’s forehead using known techniques with predictable results.
Consider claim 5, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 4 and further teaches wherein the adjustable pillars are positioned in a forehead region, a zygoma region, or a maxilla region when the wearable electronic device is donned (see Jo figure 6, element 34A, 34B, 34C and paragraphs 0045-0049).
Consider claim 7, Saito teaches a wearable electronic device, comprising: a display (see Saito figure 1, element 1, figure 15, element 1);
a facial interface (see Saito figure 1, figure 9, figure 15 and figure 16 where when head-mounted display is worn by user the portions of the device closest to a user’s face correspond to a facial interface);
an angular adjustment connection between the display and the facial interface (see Saito figure 14, elements 31, 31a, 30a, 34 and paragraphs 0075-0078 where when the left and right frames 30 are turned about the rotational axes of the shafts 31a, the left and right frames 30, 30 are always turned by an equal angle, because the gears 31a, 31a are in mesh with each other. Namely, the frames 30, 30 rotationally move in symmetry relative to the display part 1. When the frames 30 touch the temporal regions, the display part 1 always faces right front accordingly and figure 15, element 50a, 53, 52, 51, 50 and paragraphs 0082-0088 where display part 1 is attached to the frame 50 so as to be rotatable about a rotational axis 50a. A constant frictional force is given between the rotational axis 50a and the display part 1 so that the display part 1 can be fixed at any rotational position); and
a linear adjustment connection coupled directly to the angular adjustment connection between the display and the facial interface (see Saito figure 14, element 10, figure 15, element 54 and paragraph 0088 where in the present embodiment it was described that the adjustment of the observation distance was implemented by rotating the display part 1 about the rotational axis of the shaft 50a, but it can also be contemplated that the frontal pressing pad 54 is arranged movable relative to the display part 1 and the observation distance is adjusted by changing the distance between the frontal pressing pad 54 and the display part, as described referring to FIG. 2 in the first embodiment),
Saito is silent regarding the linear adjustment connection comprising: an actuator; an actuator lock engageable with the actuator; and an actuator control connected to the actuator lock.
In the same field of endeavor, Jo teaches a linear adjustment connection comprising: an actuator (see Jo figure 6, element 34A, 30 and paragraphs 0045-0049 specifically for example paragraph 0048 where posts 32 may be expanded and retracted using computer-controlled positioners 58 and/or may be expanded and retracted manually by a user); an actuator lock engageable with the actuator (see Jo paragraph 0048 where posts 32 may be locked into place at any suitable length L or may be locked into place only at predetermined lengths L); and an actuator control connected to the actuator lock (see Jo paragraph 0048 where in arrangements where posts 32 are locked at a given length using a clutch mechanism, a user may press a button or provide other user input to unlock the clutch mechanism and thereby allow posts 32 to expand or retract. In arrangements where posts 32 are locked using friction, a user may simply pull or push posts 32 to adjust the length of posts 32) so as to appropriately position display device on a user's face to align display modules with user's eyes, regardless of prominence of a user's forehead and cheeks.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have modified Saito to have a linear adjustment connection comprising: an actuator; an actuator lock engageable with the actuator; and an actuator control connected to the actuator lock so as to appropriately position display device on a user's face to align display modules with user's eyes, regardless of prominence of a user's forehead and cheeks using known techniques with predictable results.
Consider claim 8, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and further teaches wherein the actuator comprises a side slide (see Jo figure 6, element 34B, 34C, 30 and paragraph 0046 where extendable posts correspond to slide) and a top slide (see Jo figure 6, element 34A, 32 and paragraph 0046 where extendable posts correspond to slide).
Consider claim 9, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and further teaches wherein the actuator control comprises a button (see Jo paragraph 0048 where a user may press a button or provide other user input to unlock the clutch mechanism and thereby allow posts 32 to expand or retract).
Consider claim 10, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and further teaches wherein upon depressing the actuator control: the actuator lock is disengaged from the actuator (see Jo paragraph 0048 where a user may press a button or provide other user input to unlock the clutch mechanism and thereby allow posts 32 to expand or retract); and
the actuator is adjustable to translate the facial interface toward or away from the display (see Jo paragraph 0048 where a user may press a button or provide other user input to unlock the clutch mechanism and thereby allow posts 32 to expand or retract).
Consider claim 11, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 10 and further teaches wherein upon releasing the actuator control: the actuator lock is engaged with the actuator; and the actuator is positionally locked in place to inhibit translation of the facial interface toward or away from the display (see Jo paragraph 0048 where posts 32 are locked at a given length using a clutch mechanism and a user may press a button or provide other user input to unlock the clutch mechanism and thereby allow posts 32 to expand or retract. Therefore, it would have been obvious that release of button would again lock to a given length).
Consider claim 12, Saito teaches a wearable apparatus, comprising: a head-mountable display (see Saito figure 1, element 1 display part, figure 15, element 1 display part);
a facial interface (see Saito figure 1, figure 9, figure 15 and figure 16 where when head-mounted display is worn by user the portions of the device closest to a user’s face correspond to a facial interface);
a connection movably constraining the head-mountable display relative to the facial interface in a first degree of freedom (see Saito figure 14, element 10, figure 15, element 54 and paragraph 0088 where in the present embodiment it was described that the adjustment of the observation distance was implemented by rotating the display part 1 about the rotational axis of the shaft 50a, but it can also be contemplated that the frontal pressing pad 54 is arranged movable relative to the display part 1 and the observation distance is adjusted by changing the distance between the frontal pressing pad 54 and the display part, as described referring to FIG. 2 in the first embodiment) and a second degree of freedom (see Saito figure 14, elements 31, 31a, 30a, 34 and paragraphs 0075-0078 where when the left and right frames 30 are turned about the rotational axes of the shafts 31a, the left and right frames 30, 30 are always turned by an equal angle, because the gears 31a, 31a are in mesh with each other. Namely, the frames 30, 30 rotationally move in symmetry relative to the display part 1. When the frames 30 touch the temporal regions, the display part 1 always faces right front accordingly and figure 15, element 50a, 53, 52, 51, 50 and paragraphs 0082-0088 where display part 1 is attached to the frame 50 so as to be rotatable about a rotational axis 50a. A constant frictional force is given between the rotational axis 50a and the display part 1 so that the display part 1 can be fixed at any rotational position); and
an actuator control (see Saito figure 2, element 11c and paragraphs 0039-0040 where for moving the pad 10 back (away), the pair of cantilever beams 11c are bent inward (toward the long slot 11a), and then the pad 10 is pushed forward in a state in which the claws lid are disengaged from the faces 12b of the guide member 12)
Saito is silent regarding an actuator control configured to be adjacent to a maxilla region when the wearable apparatus is donned.
In the same field of endeavor, Jo teaches an adjustment connection configured to be adjacent to a maxilla region when the wearable apparatus is donned (see Jo figure 6, element 34A, 34B, 34C and paragraphs 0045-0049) so as to appropriately position display modules regardless of prominence of a user’s forehead. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have modified Saito with the teachings of Jo to have connection positioned at a zygoma region or a maxilla region so as to appropriately position display modules regardless of prominence of a user’s forehead using known techniques with predictable results.
Incorporation of an adjustment connection at a user’s cheek would result in having an actuator control adjacent to a maxilla region so as to allow moving the pad back(away) using similar techniques of Saito’s forehead pad.
Consider claim 13, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 12 and further teaches wherein the connection comprises a linear slide (see Saito figure 2 element 11c, 11a and paragraphs 0039-0040 where for moving the pad 10 back (away), the pair of cantilever beams 11c are bent inward (toward the long slot 11a), and then the pad 10 is pushed forward in a state in which the claws lid are disengaged from the faces 12b of the guide member 12. Where the structure for moving the pad forward/backward corresponds to a linear slide) .
Consider claim 14, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 13 and further teaches wherein the linear slide is back-drivable (see Saito figure 2 element 11c, 11a and paragraphs 0039-0040 where for moving the pad 10 back (away), the pair of cantilever beams 11c are bent inward (toward the long slot 11a), and then the pad 10 is pushed forward in a state in which the claws lid are disengaged from the faces 12b of the guide member 12.).
Consider claim 15, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 13 and further teaches further comprising a lock engageable with the linear slide (see Saito figure 2, element 12b).
Consider claim 16, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 15 and further teaches wherein: the linear slide comprises a first set of teeth (see Saito figure 2, element 11d); and
the lock comprises a second set of teeth engageable with the first set of teeth (see Saito figure 2, element 12b).
Consider claim 17, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 16 and further teaches wherein: the first set of teeth comprise first leading tips (see Saito figure 2, element 11d); and
the second set of teeth comprise second leading tips (see Saito figure 2, element 12b).
Consider claim 18, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 17 and further teaches wherein when the first set of teeth and the second set of teeth are engaged: the second leading tips protrude past the first set of teeth; and the first leading tips protrude past the second set of teeth (see figure 2, element 12b, 11d and paragraphs 0039-0041 where when engaged claws 11d collide against faces 12b which corresponds to leading tips protruding past each set of teeth during engagement).
Consider claim 19, Saito as modified by Jo teaches all the limitations of claim 15 and further teaches wherein the actuator control is configured to engage and disengage the lock and the linear slide (see Saito paragraphs 0039-0041 where for moving the pad 10 back (away), the pair of cantilever beams 11c are bent inward (toward the long slot 11a), for example, by remote control from the support 1a and then the pad 10 is pushed forward in a state in which the claws lid are disengaged from the faces 12b of the guide member 12).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is 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.
The claimed invention recites
Claim 20 “The wearable apparatus of claim 19, wherein the actuator control is connected to the lock via a flexible drive shaft. ”
The following prior arts are representative of the state of the prior art:
Saito, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20020008677 (figures 1-2, 14-16)
Jo et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20200081259 (figures 6-8)
Clark et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210208393 (figures 1-2)
The prior arts cited fails to fairly teach or suggest the combined features of the invention including wherein the actuator control is connected to the lock via a flexible drive shaft.
These features find support at least at figure 29 and figure 34 of Applicant’s original specification.
As such, modification of the prior art of record can only be motivated by hindsight reasoning, or by changing the intended use and function of the prior art themselves. Therefore, it is not clear that one of ordinary skill in the art would have made the necessary modifications to the prior art of record to encompass the limitations set forth in the present application. Moreover, none of the prior arts of record, taken either alone or in combination, anticipate nor render obvious the claimed inventions. Hence, claims 20 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sauers et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190079301 (face seal for head mounted display), Wang et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20240004206 (head mountable electronic device spacer).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dorothy H Harris whose telephone number is (571)270-7539. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4pm.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
/Dorothy Harris/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625