CTNF 17/481,237 CTNF 99838 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings 06-36-01 FIG. 1 is objected to because it should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated, as indicated by Applicant, for example, in paragraph [0003] of the specification. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office Action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the Examiner, the Applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informality: on line 2, “ substrate ” should be “a substrate”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-01 Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In its “Amendment Under 37 CFR §1.116” dated April 13, 2026 (hereinafter the “Response”), Applicant has amended claims 1 and 15 to include the recited limitation “ wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view ”. Applicant provided no reference in the Response to its originally filed application that supports this amended language and the Examiner can find no such support either. FIG. 2 of Applicant’s originally filed application appears to suggest a die that actually overlaps with the through glass vias (TGVs) in a vertical direction. Please see annotated FIG. 2, below. Claims 2, 6, 7, and 17-19 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) because they depend from either claim 1 or claim 15. PNG media_image1.png 586 780 media_image1.png Greyscale 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 15, and 17-19 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. Regarding claim 1, lines 14-16 recite, “ a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup, wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view. ” This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, the meaning of “ the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view ” is unclear because vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs in a vertical direction is not defined by the claim, the specification (including the drawings) does not provide a standard for ascertaining the meaning of this recited limitation, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As another example, it is unclear where the “ cross-sectional view ” is taken. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 14-16 of claim 1 as reciting: “a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup” because of this ambiguity. Claims 2 and 6 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because they depend from claim 1. Regarding claim 7, lines 4-5 recite: “ further comprising a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with the one of the one or more layers of the first buildup. ” This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and correction is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it unclear why this recited language is in claim 7 (which depends from claim 6 which depends from claim 1) because it appears to be duplicative with lines 14-15 of which recite: “ a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup ”. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is unable to determine what lines 4-5 of amended claim 7 recite beyond what is already recited in lines 14-15 of claim 1 because of this apparent duplication. Regarding claim 15, lines 14-16 recite, “ a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup, wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view. ” This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, the meaning of “ the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view ” is unclear because vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs in a vertical direction is not defined by the claim, the specification (including the drawings) does not provide a standard for ascertaining the meaning of this recited limitation, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As another example, it is unclear where the “ cross-sectional view ” is taken. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 14-16 of claim 15 as reciting: “a die coupled with the first buildup, the die electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup” because of this ambiguity. Claims 17-19 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because they depend from claim 15. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the Examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 15, and 17-19 are r ejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U S 2020/0168536 A1 (Link) in view of US 2018/0156841 A1 (Neely). R egarding claim 1, Link discloses, A substrate (substrate (150); FIG. 2 [0020]) comprising: a glass core (glass core (156); annotated FIG. 1, below; [0020] and [0022]) with a first side and a second side opposite the first side (annotated FIG. 1, below) , the glass core (156) comprising a single material layer continuous from the first side to the second side (annotated FIG. 1, below) ; PNG media_image2.png 476 708 media_image2.png Greyscale a first buildup (first buildup (162); annotated FIG. 2, below; [0020]) coupled with the first side of the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, below) , the first buildup (162) including one or more layers (annotated FIG. 2, below) ; PNG media_image3.png 772 795 media_image3.png Greyscale a second buildup (second buildup (164); annotated FIG. 2, above; [0020]) coupled with the second side of the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, above) , the second buildup (164) including one or more layers (annotated FIG. 2, above) ; wherein a number of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) is different than a number of the one or more layers of the second buildup (164) (as can be seen in annotated FIG. 2, above, first buildup (162) has six (6) layers and second buildup (164) has three (3) layers); wherein the glass core (156) further includes one or more through glass vias (TGV) (through glass vias (TGVs) (136); annotated FIG. 2, above, and annotated FIG. 3C, below; [0033]) that extend from the first side of the glass core (156) to the second side the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, above) , wherein the one or more TGV (136) are filled with an electrically conductive material (electrically conductive material (144); annotated FIG. 2, above; [[0037]) ; and PNG media_image4.png 401 593 media_image4.png Greyscale a die (die (1656); FIG. 8; [0080]) coupled with the first buildup (162) 1 , the die (1656) electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) (electrically coupling via conductive contacts (112); FIG. 1; annotated FIG. 2, above; [0021]) . 2 , wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view. 3 But, Link does not appear to explicitly disclose, that the glass core has a homogeneous material layer. However, in analogous art, Neely discloses, that it is well-known that a glass core can be homogenous ([0032]). Neely also discloses that it is well-known that a homogenous glass core can provide higher capability for definition of fine lead-to-lead pitch ([0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Link and Neely before him/her, that it is well-known that the single material layer of the glass core of Link can be homogenous , as taught by Neely, to provide higher capability for definition of fine lead-to-lead pitch, as also taught by Neely. See also, MPEP 2144(IV)—The reason or motivation to modify the reference may often suggest what the inventor has done, but for a different purpose or to solve a different problem. It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant. Regarding claim 2, Link in view of Neely discloses, The substrate (150) of claim 1, wherein the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) or the one or more layers of the second buildup (164) include copper layers (copper layers (146 and 148); FIG. 2; [0024]) . Regarding claim 6, Link in view of Neely discloses, T he substrate (150) of claim 1, wherein at least one of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) are electrically coupled with one of the one or more TGV (136) (146 and 148; FIG. 2; [0024]; [0039]; 146 and 148 in the layers of 162 are electrically coupled with conductive material (144) in TGV (136)) ; and wherein at least one of the one or more layers of the second buildup (164) are electrically coupled with the one of the one or more TGV (136) (146 and 148; FIG. 2; [0024]; [0039]; 146 and 148 in the layers of 164 are electrically coupled with conductive material (144) in TGV (136)) . Regarding claim 7, Link in view of Neely discloses, T he substrate (150) of claim 6, wherein the number of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) is greater than the number of the one or more layers of the second buildup (164) (in annotated FIG. 2, above, there are six (6) layers in first buildup (162) and three (3) layers in second buildup (164), six (6) is greater than three (3)) ; and further comprising a die (die (1656); FIG. 8; [0080]) coupled with the first buildup (162) 4 , the die (1656) electrically coupled with the one of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) (electrically coupling via conductive contacts (112); FIG. 1; annotated FIG. 2, above; [0021]) . 5 Regarding claim 15, Link discloses, A package (package (1650); FIG. 8; [0078]) comprising: substrate (substrate (1652); FIG. 8; [0080]) that includes: a glass core (glass core (156); FIG. 2; [0020]; [0022]) with a first side and a second side opposite the first side (annotated FIG. 2, above) , the glass core (156) comprising a single material layer continuous from the first side to the second side (annotated FIG. 1, above) ; a first buildup (first buildup (162); FIG. 2; [0020]) coupled with the first side of the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, above) , the first buildup including a plurality of layers (annotated FIG. 2, above) that include at least one copper layer (copper layers (146) and (148); FIG. 2; [0024]) ; a second buildup (second buildup (164); FIG. 2; [0020]) coupled with the second side of the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, above) , the second buildup including a plurality of layers (annotated FIG. 2, above) that include at least one copper layer (146 and 148; FIG. 2; [0024]) ; and wherein a number of the plurality of layers of the first buildup (162) is greater than a number of the plurality of layers of the second buildup (164) (in annotated FIG. 2, above, there are six (6) layers in first buildup (162) and three (3) layers in second buildup (164), six (6) is greater than three (3)) wherein the glass core (156) further includes one or more through glass vias (TGV) (through glass via (TGV) (136); annotated FIG. 2, above, and annotated FIG. 3C, above; [0033]) that extend from the first side of the glass core (156) to the second side of the glass core (156) (annotated FIG. 2, above) , and wherein the one or more TGV (136) are filled with copper (copper (140); annotated FIG. 3F, below; [0036]) ; PNG media_image5.png 396 566 media_image5.png Greyscale a die (die (1656); FIG. 8; [0080]) coupled with the first buildup (162), 6 the die (1656) electrically coupled with one of the one or more layers of the first buildup (162) (electrically coupling via conductive contacts (112); FIG. 1; annotated FIG. 2, above; [0021]) 7 , wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view. 8 But, Link does not appear to explicitly disclose, that the glass core has a homogeneous material layer. However, in analogous art, Neely discloses, that it is well-known that a glass core can be homogenous ([0032]). Neely also discloses that it is well-known that a homogenous glass core can provide higher capability for definition of fine lead-to-lead pitch ([0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Link and Neely before him/her, that it is well-known that the single material layer of the glass core of Link can be homogenous , as taught by Neely, to provide higher capability for definition of fine lead-to-lead pitch, as also taught by Neely. See also, MPEP 2144(IV), above. Regarding claim 17, Link in view of Neely discloses, The package (1650) of claim 15, wherein at least one of the plurality of layers of the first buildup (162) is electrically coupled with one of the one or more TGV (136) filled with copper (146 and 148; FIG. 2; [0024]; [0039]; 146 and 148 in the layers of first buildup (162) are electrically coupled with 144 in TGV 136) , and wherein at least one of the plurality of layers of the second buildup (164) is electrically coupled with the one of the one or more TGV (136) filled with copper (146 and 148; FIG. 2; [0024]; [0039]; 146 and 148 in the layers of second buildup (164) are electrically coupled with 144 in TGV (136)) . Regarding claim 18, Link in view of Neely discloses, The package (1650) of claim 15, wherein the substrate (1652) includes a first pad (first pad (148); annotated FIG. 2, above; [0024]) on the first buildup (162) and a second pad (second pad (148); annotated FIG. 2, above; [0024]) on the second buildup (164) , wherein the first pad (148) and the second pad (148) are electrically coupled through one of the one or more TGV (136) filled with copper ( first and second pads (148) are electrically couped through TGV (136) by 140, 144 and 148; annotated FIG. 2, above) . Regarding claim 19, Link in view of Neely discloses, The package (1650) of claim 18, wherein the die (1656) is electrically coupled with the first pad (148) (annotated FIG. 2, above) (conductive contact (112); FIG. 1; annotated FIG. 2, above; [0021]) . 9 Response to Amendments and Arguments Applicant’s argument on page seven (7) of the Response regarding the objection to FIG. 1 as not being labelled as “Prior Art” in the Final Office Action dated February 17, 2026 (hereinafter the “Final Office Action”) has been fully considered, but it is not deemed persuasive because it does not provide a reason why the use of the term “legacy” in describing FIG. 1 “in no way indicates that Figure 1 is necessarily Prior Art to the present Application.” For clarity of the written record, the Examiner respectfully requests that Applicant please provide an explanation of what “legacy” does mean in the specification when describing FIG. 1. Alternatively, the Examiner respectfully requests that Applicant please amend FIG. 1 to include a “Prior Art” legend. Applicant’s amendment of claims 15 and 18, as well as cancellation of claim 20, has obviated the objection to the drawings in the Final Office Action. Also, Applicant’s amendment of claims 1 and 15 and remarks with respect thereto on page seven (7) of the Response have overcome the objection to claims 1 and 15 in the Final Office Action. However, please see the new objection to claim 15, as detailed above in this Office Action, based on Applicant’s amendment thereof in the Response. Additionally, Applicant’s amendment of claims 1 and 15 and remarks on pages seven (7)-eight (8) of the Response have overcome the rejection of claims 1, 2, 6, 15, and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in the Final Office Action. However, the rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in the Final Office Action was not addressed in Applicant’s Response. Furthermore, Applicant’s amendment of claims 1 and 15 and arguments with respect thereto on pages seven (7)-eight (8) of the Response have necessitated new grounds for rejection of claims 1, 2, 6, 15, and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in this Office Action, as detailed above. Still furthermore, Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 15 and arguments with respect thereto on pages eight (8)-eleven (11) of the Response have been fully considered, but they are not deemed persuasive for at least the reasons detailed above in this Office Action. For example, regarding the amended language “ wherein the die is vertically non-overlapping with the TGVs along a vertical direction in a cross-sectional view ” added to claims 1 and 15, pages eight (8)-eleven (11) of the Response do not appear to indicate where there is support in Applicant’s originally filed application for this amended language. Also, as detailed above, this added language is indefinite. Additionally, depending on how this indefinite language is interpreted, Link may actually disclose this amended limitation, as illustrated, for example, in annotated FIG. 7, thereof, below. PNG media_image6.png 561 777 media_image6.png Greyscale Notwithstanding the above, to advance prosecution, the Examiner respectfully requests that Applicant please consider initiating a telephone interview with the Examiner to discuss amendments to the claims that Applicant would like to propose to overcome the rejections thereof, prior to submitting a written response to this Office Action. The Examiner would welcome such a conversation and is available at the telephone number indicated below. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Erik A. Anderson whose telephone number is (703) 756-1217. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. (Pacific Time Zone). 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 B. Partridge , can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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. /ERIK A. ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2812 /William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 2 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 3 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 4 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 6 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 7 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 8 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 9 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 10 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 11 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 12 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 13 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 14 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 16 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 17/481,237 Page 17 Art Unit: 2812 1 Substrate (150) may correspond to substrate (1652) in FIG. 8, as noted, for example, in paragraphs [0020] and [0078] of Link. Substrate (1652) includes conductive contacts (1663) ([0080]). Die (1656) may be coupled to conductive contacts (1663) via first-level interconnects (1665) ([0081]). 2 As noted above, substrate (150) includes first buildup (162) which includes one or more layers, so corresponding substrate (1652) also includes a first buildup with one or more layers. Substrate (1652) includes conductive contacts (112) that interconnect with die (1656), thereby electrically coupling die (1656) with the one or more layers of first buildup (162). 3 Please see rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC § 112(b), above, for how claim 1 is being interpreted for purpose of examination. 4 Substrate (150) may correspond to substrate (1652) in FIG. 8, as noted, for example, in paragraphs [0020] and [0078] of Link. Substrate (1652) includes conductive contacts (1663) ([0080]). Die (1656) may be coupled to conductive contacts (1663) via first-level interconnects (1665) ([0081]). 5 Please see rejection of claim 7 under 35 USC § 112(b), above, for how claim 7 is being interpreted for purpose of examination. Also, as noted above, substrate (150) includes first buildup (162) which includes one or more layers, so corresponding substrate (1652) also includes a first buildup with one or more layers. Substrate (1652) includes conductive contacts (112) that interconnect with die (1656), thereby electrically coupling die (1656) with the one or more layers of first buildup (162). 6 Substrate (150) may correspond to interposer (1657) in FIG. 8, as noted, for example, in paragraphs [0020] and [0078] of Link. Die (1656) is coupled to Interposer (1657) via conductive contacts (1654) of die (1656), first-level interconnects (1658), and conductive contacts (1660) of interposer (1657) ([0082]). 7 As noted above, substrate (150) includes first buildup (162) which includes one or more layers, so corresponding substrate (1652) also includes a first buildup with one or more layers. Substrate (1652) includes conductive contacts (112) that interconnect with die (1656), thereby electrically coupling die (1656) with the one or more layers of first buildup (162). 8 Please see rejection of claim 15 under 35 USC § 112(b), above, for how claim 15 is being interpreted for purpose of examination. 9 Substrate (150) may correspond to interposer (1657) in FIG. 8, as noted, for example, in paragraphs [0020] and [0078] of Link. Die (1656) is electrically coupled to Interposer (1657) via conductive contacts (1654) of die (1656), first-level interconnects (1658), and conductive contacts (1660) of interposer (1657) ([0082]). Interposer (1657) includes conductive contacts (112) that interconnect with die (1656), thereby electrically coupling die (1656) with the first pad of interposer 1657.
Prosecution Insights