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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 10/17/2025 and 3/19/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, line 1 – page 12, line 3, filed 12/29/2025 with respect to claims 1-14, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informality: in line 6, "wherein the at least one processor perform the following:" should read, "wherein the at least one processor performs the following:". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informality: in line 7, "first performance operation on an electronic musical instrument should read, "first performance operation on the electronic musical instrument." Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kafaku et al. (US 20190164529 A1, May 30, 2019), hereinafter Kafaku, in view of Pachet (US 20020194984 A1, December 26, 2002).
Regarding claim 1, Kafaku teaches a method of adaptively outputting data indicating an end of user performance to a user who has been performing on an electronic musical instrument, performed by at least one processor in an information processing device for the electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0006: "An information processing device includes: a display; and a processor configured to execute the following processes: a reception process of receiving input of performance information including pitch information, a first image output process of outputting on the display a first image according to the performance information received in the reception process, a performance determination process of determining at least any of tonality, a chord type, and a pitch name on the basis of the performance information received in the reception process, a performance end determination process of determining whether performance ends, and a second image output process of outputting on the display a second image according to a result determined in the performance determination process when the end of performance is determined in the performance end determination process."), the method comprising, via the at least one processor: obtaining data of a first performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0057-0058: "When the user depresses a key 10 of the electronic musical instrument 1 for performance, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the depression of the key 10. When the depression of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 (control LSI) of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note on including pitch information (note number, velocity, etc.) or the like) corresponding to the depressed key 10"); obtaining data of a second performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0059-0060: "In contrast, when the user releases a depressed key 10, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the release of the key 10. When the release of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note off) corresponding to the released key 10"); and determining that the user has ended performance on the electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends") and outputting the data indicating the end of user performance to the user (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends, the process proceeds to step S5 to perform a second image output process of outputting and displaying a second image, which is described later, on the display TB2").
Kafaku does not explicitly disclose updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations; and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period.
However, Pachet teaches updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "The value of phraseThreshold can advantageously be made a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos. This can be effected either by a user input setting through a software interface and/or preferably on an automatic basis. In the latter case, an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly. For instance, the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals"), and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period (Pachet ¶0264: "To detect phrase endings, the embodiment introduces a phrase detection thread which periodically wakes up and computes the time elapsed between the current time and the time of the last note played. This elapsed time delta is then compared with a phraseThreshold value, which represents the maximum time delay between successive notes of a given phrase. If the time delta is less than phraseThreshold, the process sleeps for a number SleepTime of milliseconds. If the time delta is not less than phraseThreshold, an end of phrase is detected").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kafaku by adding the real-time determination updating and determination period of Pachet to successfully detect the interruption of music even if its tempo or rhythm changes (Pachet ¶0272).
Regarding claim 2, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kafaku further teaches that the data indicating the end of user performance includes an image data (Kafaku ¶0128: "According to the present embodiment, the second image includes a plurality of flower patterns and a plurality of leaf patterns, and at the end of the performance, an image like a bouquet is displayed on the display TB2.").
Regarding claim 3, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Pachet further teaches that the updating the determination period in real time includes changing a reference value that is used to set the determination period in real time based on the plurality of performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "The value of phraseThreshold can advantageously be made a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos. This can be effected either by a user input setting through a software interface and/or preferably on an automatic basis. In the latter case, an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly.").
Regarding claim 5, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kafaku further teaches that the updating the determination period includes: determining whether or not performance operations by the user are musical (Kafaku ¶0090: "the correctness of chord progression and the beat regularity of the received performance information are also determined in the performance determination process (step S2), evaluation of playing music by the performer is further determined on the basis of the performance information").
Pachet further teaches that updating the determination period based on the determination result of whether or not the performance operations by the user are musical (Pachet ¶0272: "an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly").
Regarding claim 7, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Pachet further teaches that the determination period is updated based on time intervals with respect to one or more performance operations in addition to the first and second performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals (j being an arbitrarily chosen number) and use that current average value as the value of phraseThreshold").
Regarding claim 8, Kafaku teaches an information processing device for adaptively outputting data indicating an end of user performance to a user who has been performing on an electronic musical instrument, comprising: an input/output interface; and at least one processor (Kafaku ¶0006: "An information processing device includes: a display; and a processor configured to execute the following processes: a reception process of receiving input of performance information including pitch information, a first image output process of outputting on the display a first image according to the performance information received in the reception process, a performance determination process of determining at least any of tonality, a chord type, and a pitch name on the basis of the performance information received in the reception process, a performance end determination process of determining whether performance ends, and a second image output process of outputting on the display a second image according to a result determined in the performance determination process when the end of performance is determined in the performance end determination process."), wherein the at least one processor performs the following: obtaining, via the input/output interface, first performance data corresponding to a first performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0057-0058: "When the user depresses a key 10 of the electronic musical instrument 1 for performance, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the depression of the key 10. When the depression of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 (control LSI) of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note on including pitch information (note number, velocity, etc.) or the like) corresponding to the depressed key 10") and second performance data corresponding to a second performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0059-0060: "In contrast, when the user releases a depressed key 10, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the release of the key 10. When the release of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note off) corresponding to the released key 10"); and determining that the user has ended performance on the electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends") and outputting the data indicating the end of user performance to the user (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends, the process proceeds to step S5 to perform a second image output process of outputting and displaying a second image, which is described later, on the display TB2").
Kafaku does not explicitly disclose updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations; and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period.
However, Pachet teaches updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "The value of phraseThreshold can advantageously be made a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos. This can be effected either by a user input setting through a software interface and/or preferably on an automatic basis. In the latter case, an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly. For instance, the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals"), and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period (Pachet ¶0264: "To detect phrase endings, the embodiment introduces a phrase detection thread which periodically wakes up and computes the time elapsed between the current time and the time of the last note played. This elapsed time delta is then compared with a phraseThreshold value, which represents the maximum time delay between successive notes of a given phrase. If the time delta is less than phraseThreshold, the process sleeps for a number SleepTime of milliseconds. If the time delta is not less than phraseThreshold, an end of phrase is detected").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kafaku by adding the real-time determination updating and determination period of Pachet to successfully detect the interruption of music even if its tempo or rhythm changes (Pachet ¶0272).
Regarding claim 9, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Kafaku further teaches that the data indicating the end of user performance includes an image data (Kafaku ¶0128: "According to the present embodiment, the second image includes a plurality of flower patterns and a plurality of leaf patterns, and at the end of the performance, an image like a bouquet is displayed on the display TB2.").
Regarding claim 10, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Pachet further teaches that in updating the determination period in real time, the at least one processor changes a reference value that is used to set the determination period in real time based on the plurality of performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "The value of phraseThreshold can advantageously be made a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos. This can be effected either by a user input setting through a software interface and/or preferably on an automatic basis. In the latter case, an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly.").
Regarding claim 12, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Kafaku further teaches that in updating the determination period, the at least one processor performs the following: determining whether or not performance operations by the user are musical (Kafaku ¶0090: "the correctness of chord progression and the beat regularity of the received performance information are also determined in the performance determination process (step S2), evaluation of playing music by the performer is further determined on the basis of the performance information").
Pachet further teaches that updating the determination period based on the determination result of whether or not the performance operations by the user are musical (Pachet ¶0272: "an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly").
Regarding claim 14, Kafaku teaches an image display system for adaptively outputting image data indicating an end of user performance to a user who has been performing on an electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0006: "An information processing device includes: a display; and a processor configured to execute the following processes: a reception process of receiving input of performance information including pitch information, a first image output process of outputting on the display a first image according to the performance information received in the reception process, a performance determination process of determining at least any of tonality, a chord type, and a pitch name on the basis of the performance information received in the reception process, a performance end determination process of determining whether performance ends, and a second image output process of outputting on the display a second image according to a result determined in the performance determination process when the end of performance is determined in the performance end determination process."), comprising: the electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0018: "As illustrated in FIG. 1, the electronic musical instrument 1 to which the information processing device TB according to the present embodiment is connected is, for example, an electronic keyboard instrument, such as an electronic piano, a synthesizer, or an electronic organ."); and a display device (Kafaku ¶0041: "In the present embodiment, as illustrated in FIG. 1, the information processing device TB is a tablet mobile terminal, and an application for causing the display TB2 to display an image as described later is installed."), wherein the electronic musical instrument sends, to the display device, first performance data corresponding to a first performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0057-0058: "When the user depresses a key 10 of the electronic musical instrument 1 for performance, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the depression of the key 10. When the depression of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 (control LSI) of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note on including pitch information (note number, velocity, etc.) or the like) corresponding to the depressed key 10") and second performance data corresponding to a second performance operation on the electronic musical instrument by the user (Kafaku ¶¶0059-0060: "In contrast, when the user releases a depressed key 10, the key depression detecting switch 50 detects the release of the key 10. When the release of the key 10 is detected, the processor 80 of the electronic musical instrument 1 generates performance information (for example, note off) corresponding to the released key 10"), and wherein the display device performs the following: obtaining the first performance data and the second performance data (Kafaku ¶0066: "When the performance information transmitted from the electronic musical instrument 1 is received by the communication circuit TB3 of the information processing device TB (step S1: YES), the processor TB5 performs a reception process of receiving the input of the performance information"); determining that the user has ended performance on the electronic musical instrument (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends") and displaying the image data indicating the end of user performance to the user (Kafaku ¶0063: "Specifically, when a predetermined time has passed without input of the performance information (step S4: YES), that is, when reception of the performance information is not detected for a certain period of time, the processor 80 determines that the performance ends, the process proceeds to step S5 to perform a second image output process of outputting and displaying a second image, which is described later, on the display TB2").
Kafaku does not explicitly disclose updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations; and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period.
However, Pachet teaches updating a determination period in real time based on a plurality of performance operations on the electronic musical instrument including the first and second performance operations (Pachet ¶0272: "The value of phraseThreshold can advantageously be made a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos. This can be effected either by a user input setting through a software interface and/or preferably on an automatic basis. In the latter case, an algorithm is provided to measure the time interval between successive items of recently inputted music data and to adapt the value of phraseThreshold accordingly. For instance, the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals"), and when a time elapsed from a last note-off event becomes longer than the determination period (Pachet ¶0264: "To detect phrase endings, the embodiment introduces a phrase detection thread which periodically wakes up and computes the time elapsed between the current time and the time of the last note played. This elapsed time delta is then compared with a phraseThreshold value, which represents the maximum time delay between successive notes of a given phrase. If the time delta is less than phraseThreshold, the process sleeps for a number SleepTime of milliseconds. If the time delta is not less than phraseThreshold, an end of phrase is detected").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the image display system of Kafaku by adding the real-time determination updating and determination period of Pachet to successfully detect the interruption of music even if its tempo or rhythm changes (Pachet ¶0272).
Claims 4, 6, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kafaku in view of Pachet, and further in view of Lenz (US 20100313736 A1, December 16, 2010).
Regarding claim 4, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Pachet further teaches that updating the determination period such that when the detected tempo is a second tempo that is slower than a first tempo, the determination period for the second tempo is made larger than the determination period that would be determined for the first tempo (Pachet ¶0272: "For instance, the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals (j being an arbitrarily chosen number) and use that current average value as the value of phraseThreshold. In this way, the system will successfully detect the interruption of a musical to be continued even if its tempo/rhythm changes.").
Kafaku (in view of Pachet) does not explicitly disclose that the updating the determination period in real time includes: detecting a tempo based on first performance data generated based on the first performance operation and second performance data generated based on the second performance operation.
However, Lenz teaches that the updating the determination period in real time includes: detecting a tempo based on first performance data generated based on the first performance operation and second performance data generated based on the second performance operation (Lenz ¶0039: "In performance mode, the comparison module 302 attempts to follow the performer, by determining the effective tempo at any given moment and feeding it to a display module 304, which then makes adjustments in the scrolling speed of the score on monitor 102 to match the performer's current tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kafaku (as modified by Pachet) by adding the tempo detection of Lenz to make the value of phraseThreshold a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos (Pachet ¶0272).
Regarding claim 6, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches a method comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kafaku (in view of Pachet) does not explicitly disclose that the updating the determination period includes: when a number of performance data generated or obtained during a set period does not reach a threshold, making the determination period longer than when the number of performance data generated or obtained during the set period reaches the threshold.
However, Lenz teaches that the updating the determination period includes: when a number of performance data generated or obtained during a set period does not reach a threshold, making the determination period longer than when the number of performance data generated or obtained during the set period reaches the threshold (Lenz ¶0040: "For example, a list of the last 10 measurements (or all the measurements taken in the last 10 seconds; these are different sampling approaches but do not change the concept or limit the invention) can be averaged to obtain a moving average that will exhibit more stable behavior.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kafaku (as modified by Pachet) by adding the determination periods of Lenz to reduce computational load and reduce jerkiness by sampling at lower frequencies (Lenz ¶0040).
Regarding claim 11, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Pachet further teaches that updating the determination period such that when the detected tempo is a second tempo that is slower than a first tempo, the determination period for the second tempo is made larger in time than the determination period that would be determined for the first tempo (Pachet ¶0272: "For instance, the algorithm can calculate continuously a sliding average of the last j above time intervals (j being an arbitrarily chosen number) and use that current average value as the value of phraseThreshold. In this way, the system will successfully detect the interruption of a musical to be continued even if its tempo/rhythm changes.").
Kafaku (in view of Pachet) does not explicitly disclose that in updating the determination period in real time, the at least one processor performs the following: detecting a tempo based on the first performance data and the second performance data.
However, Lenz teaches that in updating the determination period in real time, the at least one processor performs the following: detecting a tempo based on the first performance data and the second performance data (Lenz ¶0039: "In performance mode, the comparison module 302 attempts to follow the performer, by determining the effective tempo at any given moment and feeding it to a display module 304, which then makes adjustments in the scrolling speed of the score on monitor 102 to match the performer's current tempo.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kafaku (as modified by Pachet) by adding the tempo detection of Lenz to make the value of phraseThreshold a dynamic variable so as to accommodate to different tempos (Pachet ¶0272).
Regarding claim 13, Kafaku (in view of Pachet) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Kafaku (in view of Pachet) does not explicitly disclose that in updating the determination period, the at least one processor performs the following: when a number of performance data generated or obtained during a set period does not reach a threshold, making the determination period longer than when the number of performance data generated or obtained during the set period reaches the threshold.
Howeer, Lenz teaches that in updating the determination period, the at least one processor performs the following: when a number of performance data generated or obtained during a set period does not reach a threshold, making the determination period longer than when the number of performance data generated or obtained during the set period reaches the threshold (Lenz ¶0040: "For example, a list of the last 10 measurements (or all the measurements taken in the last 10 seconds; these are different sampling approaches but do not change the concept or limit the invention) can be averaged to obtain a moving average that will exhibit more stable behavior.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kafaku (as modified by Pachet) by adding the determination periods of Lenz to reduce computational load and reduce jerkiness by sampling at lower frequencies (Lenz ¶0040).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP SCOLES whose telephone number is (703)756-1831. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 ET.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached on 571-270-7938. 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.
/PHILIP G SCOLES/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights