UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/440,070
`
`02/23/2017
`
`Xinbing Liu
`
`MATB-443US
`
`9293
`
`07/29/2019
`
`759°
`””2
`RATNERPRESTIA
`
`2200 Renaissance Blvd
`Suite 350
`
`King of Pmssia, PA 19406
`
`GONZALEZ RAMOS” MAYLA
`
`1721
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/29/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`PCorrespondence @ ratnerprestiacom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0,7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/440,070
`Examiner
`MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS
`
`Applicant(s)
`Liu, Xinbing
`Art Unit
`1721
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 04/29/2019.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 02/23/2017 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)[:] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:I All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) C] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190722
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Status of Claims
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Claim(s) 1-7 are currently pending.
`
`Claim(s) 8-14 have been canceled.
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`4.
`
`Applicant’s election without traverse of Group | (claims 1-7) and Species C (Fig.
`
`8) in the reply filed on 10/15/2018 is acknowledged.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`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.
`
`6.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
`
`obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 3
`
`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.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over US 2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau.
`
`Regarding claim 1
`
`Lu teaches a photovoltaic array (panel concentrator module system 100
`
`comprising concentrator assemblies 150, each having a PV chip having solar cells
`
`mounted on a base plate) [Figs. 1a-1 b, 2a-2b, 4a-4b, paragraphs 0016, 0024-0026 and
`
`0031] comprising:
`
`a two-dimensional array of photovoltaic cells having a plurality of rows (PV cells
`
`are attached in recess 51 of each concentrator assembly 150 which are arranged in a
`
`plurality of rows) [Figs. 1a-1 b, 2a-2b, 4a-4b, paragraphs 0016, 0024-0026 and 0031],
`
`each row of photovoltaic cells having a pivot axis parallel to the row (each row of
`
`concentrator assemblies 150 having PV cells 20 pivot in an axes parallel to the row e.g.,
`
`x-axis) [Figs. 1a-1 b, 2a-2b, paragraphs 0016 and 0025],
`
`each cell having a lens (optics 10 comprising a lens) [paragraphs 0026 and 0031]
`
`having a front surface configured to concentrate light normal to the front surface onto
`
`the photovoltaic element [paragraphs 0026 and 0028]; and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 4
`
`a tilt actuator (motor), coupled to each of the rows of photovoltaic elements to
`
`pivot the rows of photovoltaic elements about their pivot axes [paragraphs 0025 and
`
`0027)
`
`Lu does not teach a rotational actuator, coupled to the array of photovoltaic cells
`
`configured to rotate the array of photovoltaic cells about an axis perpendicular to a
`
`plane defined by the array of photovoltaic elements.
`
`Littau teaches mounting a photovoltaic array (one or more solar energy collection
`
`elements e.g., PV cells) on a movable support (turntable) comprising a rotational
`
`actuator (rotational positioning system 130 comprises actuator/motor 135) so that the
`
`photovoltaic device rotates about an axis perpendicular to a plane defined by the array
`
`of photovoltaic elements [Abstract, Figs. 1a-1 b and 3, paragraphs 0011-0012 and 0034-
`
`0035]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to providing such
`
`rotational movement in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, maximizes
`
`the power generation efficiency and further allows tracking to take place for most pitch
`
`angles [paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`Lu and Littau are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic arrays.
`
`It
`
`would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
`
`of the invention to modify the array of Lu to comprise a rotational actuator (which is
`
`coupled to a turntable) as in Littau in order to provide the rotational movement of the
`
`array (which allows tracking to take place for most pitch angles) in addition to the
`
`adjustment of the angular positions, thereby maximizing the power generation efficiency
`
`and effectively tracking the sun [Littau, paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Regarding claim 2
`
`Page 5
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 2 depends, have been set forth
`
`above.
`
`Modified Lu teaches a motor with a helical lead screw (see helical gear 203) as
`
`the tilt actuator for pivoting the rows of photovoltaic elements (x-axis rotation of
`
`concentrator assemblies 150 is accomplished by turning axles 142 from a gear set 203
`
`through a handle 145 and a connecting bar 144) [Fig. 2a and paragraph 0027].
`
`While, Modified Lu teaches a motor as the rotational actuator for rotating the
`
`array of photovoltaic elements [Littau, paragraphs 0011-0012 and 0034-0035], the
`
`embodiment depicting the rotational actuator does not disclose a stepper motor.
`
`However, Lu shows that stepper motors are generally used in the art to perform
`
`rotational adjustments in photovoltaic concentrator arrays [paragraphs 0025 and 0040].
`
`Further actuators include hydraulic or pneumatic systems and robotic adjustors.
`
`Therefore, because Lu teaches choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable types of actuators, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious
`
`to pursue the known options with reasonable expectation of success [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Since Lu teaches that a stepper leads to the anticipated success of performing perform
`
`rotational adjustments said type of actuating device is not of innovation but of ordinary
`
`skill and common sense [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Regarding claim 4
`
`Modified Lu teaches the photovoltaic array as set forth above, further comprising:
`
`a fixed axis bar (140) connected to of each of the rows by a first pin (186) [Lu, Figs. 1a-
`
`1b and paragraph 0025]; and a pivot driver bar (axle 42) connected to each of the rows
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 6
`
`by a second pin (171) [Lu, Figs. 1a-1 b and paragraph 0025], wherein the tilt actuator
`
`(motor) pivots the rows by moving the pivot driver bar relative to the fixed axis bar [Lu,
`
`Figs. 1a-1 b, paragraphs 0025, 0027].
`
`8.
`
`Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US
`
`2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims 1-2 and
`
`4 above, and further in view of US 2014/0373903, Hashimoto et al.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 3 depends, have been set forth
`
`above.
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not teach flexible wiring electrically connecting the
`
`photovoltaic cells to each other.
`
`Hashimoto teaches electrically connecting a plurality of photovoltaic cells using
`
`flexible wiring members which are known to effectively connect photovoltaic cells to
`
`each other and, due to their flexible nature, stress is even less likely to be applied
`
`between wiring member and each photovoltaic cell, thereby producing a photovoltaic
`
`device with improved endurance [paragraphs 0003, 0020 and 0025].
`
`Modified Lu and Hashimoto are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the photovoltaic cells of modified Lu to be
`
`connected to each other using flexible wiring because such achieves an effective
`
`electrical connection between cells and, due to their flexible nature, stress is even less
`
`likely to be applied between wiring member and each photovoltaic cell, thereby
`
`producing a photovoltaic device with improved endurance [Hashimoto, paragraphs
`
`0003, 0020 and 0025].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 7
`
`9.
`
`Claims 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over US 2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims
`
`1-2 and 4 above, and further in view of US 20110067688, Reif et al.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claims 5 and 6 depend, have been set
`
`forth above.
`
`Regarding claim 5
`
`Modified Lu teaches a controller for controlling the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not an open loop controller for controlling the
`
`rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and
`
`date of year values provided by a clock circuit.
`
`Reif teaches a tracking system including an open loop controller for controlling
`
`the rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values
`
`and date of year values provided by a clock circuit (an open-loop controller with an
`
`internal clock and a set of pre-calculated motor parameters effects the repositioning of
`
`one or more elements of the solar concentrator system based upon system settings
`
`such as, for example, geographical location of the solar concentrator system the
`
`positioning adjustments may vary) [paragraph 0156].
`
`Modified Lu and Reif are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic tracking
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the controller of modified Lu with an open loop
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 8
`
`controller as in Reif because such can effectively issue control signals that adjust the
`
`position the photovoltaic elements [Reif, paragraphs 0155-0156].
`
`Regarding claim 6
`
`Modified Lu teaches a controller for controlling the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not teach a closed loop controller for controlling the
`
`rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and
`
`date of year values provided by a clock circuit, and based on a signal output by the
`
`array.
`
`Reif teaches a tracking system including an closed loop controller for controlling
`
`the rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values
`
`and date of year values provided by a clock circuit (a closed-loop control system relying
`
`on both pre-derived calculated i.e., comprising a clock circuit, as well as external
`
`monitoring devices such as sensors which detect conditions affecting the system, effect
`
`the repositioning of the one of more elements) [paragraphs 0155, 0157 and 0160].
`
`Modified Lu and Reif are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic tracking
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the controller of modified Lu with a closed loop
`
`controller as in Reif because such can effectively issue control signals that adjust the
`
`position the photovoltaic elements [Reif, paragraphs 0155, 0157 and 0160].
`
`10.
`
`Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US
`
`2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims 1 and 4
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 9
`
`above, and further in view of US 2011/0030672, Olsson and US 9,291,696, Adest et
`
`al.
`
`above.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 7 depends, have been set forth
`
`Modified Lu teaches a controller for controlling the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`Modified Ly does not teach a capacitor.
`
`Olsson teaches that batteries or capacitors can be used to store the energy from
`
`the photovoltaic cells to provide power to operate both motorized rotation axes
`
`[paragraph 0055].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the photovoltaic array of modified Lu to comprise a
`
`capacitor in order to store energy generated from the PV cells which then can be used
`
`to provide power to operate the motorized rotations [Olsson, paragraph 0055].
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not teach the controller being a partially analog
`
`controller for controlling the rotational actuator and tilt actuator to track sunlight based
`
`on an analog comparison between a present signal output by the array and a previous
`
`signal output by the array stored in a capacitor.
`
`Adest teaches controlling the position of a photovoltaic array using an analog
`
`controller, a digital controller of a combination thereof [Col. 3, lines 62-64 and Col. 4,
`
`lines 57-67 to Col. 5, lines 1-13].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 10
`
`Therefore, because Adest teaches choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable types controllers for controlling actuators that are adapted to adjust the
`
`position of photovoltaic arrays, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious
`
`to pursue the known options with reasonable expectation of success [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Since Adest teaches that a combination of analog and digital circuitry leads to the
`
`anticipated success, said type of controller is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and
`
`common sense [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`11.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2019 have been fully considered but they are
`
`not persuasive.
`
`Applicant argues that since Lu is capable of tracking the motion of the sun
`
`without modification, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had no need to add a
`
`third rotational element to the system of Lu.
`
`Applicant argues that modifying Lu as proposed would have decreased the
`
`efficiency of the system of Lu, by adding a third, unnecessary rotational system.
`
`Applicant argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have replaced one
`
`of the rotational axes of Lu with the claimed rotational actuator.
`
`Applicant furher argues that such a modification would impermissibly change the
`
`principle of operation of Lu, by replacing the individual pivot mechanisms of Lu with a
`
`large array-based rotational system.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 11
`
`Examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner is not proposing modifying the
`
`pivoting mechanism in Lu. Rather, the rejection proposes positioning the system of Lu
`
`on a rotating platform which is in turn coupled to a rotational actuator which allows
`
`tracking to take place for most pitch angles) in order to provide the rotational movement
`
`of the array (in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, thereby maximizing
`
`the power generation efficiency and effectively tracking the sun [Littau, paragraphs 0012
`
`and 0042]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to providing such
`
`rotational movement in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, maximizes
`
`the power generation efficiency and further allows tracking to take place for most pitch
`
`angles [paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference
`
`may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the
`
`claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references.
`
`Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have
`
`suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208
`
`USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
`
`Applicant argues that Lu specifically teaches away from the use of a single "large
`
`tracking structure" for rotating arrays of concentrator assemblies. See Lu at H 3;
`
`M.P.E.P. § 2145(X)(D)(2)
`
`Examiner respectfully disagrees. As set forth above, the test for obviousness is
`
`not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the
`
`structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly
`
`suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 12
`
`teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
`
`One of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to providing such
`
`rotational movement in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, maximizes
`
`the power generation efficiency and further allows tracking to take place for most pitch
`
`angles [paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`12.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`Conclusion
`
`applicant's disclosure.
`
`US 2012/0305077, Arab et al.
`
`US 2010/0218806, Arab et al.
`
`US 2013/0306136, Hendrickson, JR.
`
`13.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the event a first reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later
`
`than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 13
`
`14.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS whose telephone number
`
`is (571)272-5054. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 9:00-
`
`5:00 - 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, Jennifer Michener can be reached on 571 -272—1424. The fax phone
`
`number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-
`
`273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272—1000.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/440,070
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`/MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
`
`Page 14
`
`