DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 12, 15, 18, 19, 22, 25-32, 45-49 are amended.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-19, 22, 25-32, 45-50 are pending.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application filed in PCT CN 2020093661 on 06/01/2020 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11-19, 22, 25-32, 45-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Bengtsson (WO 2019233830) in view of Badic (US 10812125).
Regarding Claims 1, 19, Bengtsson teaches the following limitations:
A method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: (Bengtsson – [pg. 2 para. 3])
a memory storing computer-executable instructions; and at least one processor coupled with the memory and configured to execute the computer- executable instructions (Bengtsson – [pg. 2 para. 4])
connecting to a base station via a radio access technology (RAT); (Bengtsson – [pg. 9 para. 3], [pg. 7 para. 4] a 3GPP NR 5G cellular network can be used. Here, a mm-wave frequency band can be used for the wireless communication. Hereinafter, primarily techniques of wirelessly communicating between a UE and a base station (BS) of a communication system implemented by a cellular network are described.
receiving sensing information from the base station, the sensing information including a power level selected by the base station to limit interference during a wireless sensing activity to be performed by the UE using the RAT; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 8] As a further general rule, beamforming may be implemented in uplink (UL) and/or in downlink (DL). [pg. 8 para. 9] there may be DL control signaling by means of which the BS can restrict one or more operational parameters of the UE performing the radar probing, e.g., in case interference in the cell increases. Corresponding radar-probing constraints may include one or more of: a transmit power restriction; restricted directions as part of a spatial restriction; a timing restriction; a frequency band restriction; etc. [pg. 9 para. 2] to set a transmit power of the radar probing based on the spectral power level. For example, if it is judged that one or more other UEs are in close vicinity - due to a high spectral power level - then the transmit power may be appropriately adjusted, e.g., lowered.)
determining whether an application of the wireless sensing activity is a high priority application; and performing, via the RAT, the wireless sensing activity (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 8], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2] Bengtsson does not explicitly teach “at a second power level greater than the first power level”.)
Bengtsson does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Badic, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
at a second power level greater than the first power level (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39] In other words, controller 2412 may assign the higher-priority data packet to the high exposure power limit window and the lower-priority data packet to the low exposure power limit window. This means that, when terminal device 2400 transmits the first and second data packets, the first data packet will likely have a higher transmit power than the second data packet (e.g., the uplink transmit power will be larger, and will have a larger power margin during the high exposure power limit window). This may be advantageous because the first data packet has higher priority and can be transmitted with higher transmit power, increasing the probability that the network access node will successfully receive and decode it.)
Examiner’s note: The following is one of many examples to clarify that wireless sensing activity is included in the power/priority relationship. (Badic – [col. 43 ln. 24-40] it can be beneficial to minimize beamsweeping time and to reduce the power expended by terminal devices during beamsweeping. Accordingly, in some aspects of this disclosure a terminal device may use object sensing to identify sectors that are blocked by objects or human bodies. The terminal device may then skip these sectors during the beamsweeping. Some aspects may also use the object sensing to identify which sectors may be sensitive to retransmit power restrictions due to the presence of human bodies. For example, a terminal device may detect a human object in a given sector and then consider how much it would need to reduce its transmit power in that sector in order to comply with maximum human exposure power limits. Some aspects may also implement the sensor using the actual antenna array, such as a mmWave radar sensor that uses the same antenna array for object sensing and wireless communication.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the various transmission powers of Bengtsson with the higher/lower priority associated with higher/lower transmit power of a transmission of Badic in order to increase the probability that the network access node will successfully receive and decode the transmission or restrict power based on exposure power limits (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39], [col. 43 ln. 24-40]).
Regarding Claim 2, Bengtsson further teaches:
further comprising when the application is not a high priority application, performing the wireless sensing activity at a power (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 8], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2])
Bengtsson does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Badic, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
third power level (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the various transmission powers of Bengtsson with the higher/lower priority associated with higher/lower transmit power of a transmission of Badic in order to increase the probability that the network access node will successfully receive and decode the transmission or restrict power based on exposure power limits (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39], [col. 43 ln. 24-40]).
Regarding Claim 3, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein performing the wireless sensing activity comprises: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
identifying a context of the wireless sensing activity; (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3] Radar probing may be employed for object detection and/or positioning use cases. Radar probing may include transmission of radar signals, e.g., pulsed or continuous radio waves, from a wireless communication device such as a UE… selected from the group comprising: a phase offset; a time-of-flight; an amplitude; a path loss; a frequency shift; an angle of arrival; and a polarization. Thereby, a distance, and/or a size, and/or a speed, and/or a direction of movement, and/or an acceleration of an object providing the reflection can be determined.)
determining that the power level corresponds to the context; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 9 para. 2])
performing, via the RAT at the power level, the wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 7 para. 2] A coupling between components may also be established over a wireless connection. Functional blocks may be implemented in hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof. Hereinafter, techniques that facilitate coexistence between radar probing and communication on a wireless link (wireless communication) are described. Specifically, the techniques described herein facilitate a UE to implement, both, radar probing and wireless communication. [pg. 7 para. 5] For cost and size reasons, it may be advantageous to re-use the same hardware for radar probing and wireless communication.
Regarding Claim 5, Bengtsson further teaches:
further comprising sending a request for the power level to the base station, and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
wherein receiving the sensing information from the base station comprises: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving a sensing activity grant including resource information for performance of the wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
Regarding Claim 6, Bengtsson further teaches:
further comprising: determining a context of the wireless sensing activity; and (Bengtsson [pg. 7 para. 3])
sending a request for the power level to the base station, (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 10 para. 10]First, at optional block 2001, it is checked whether the wireless communication device is clear to perform radar probing.)
the request including a context identifier identifying the context of the wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 3] a codebook (CB) operational mode. The CB operational mode may determine a beam by selecting a given beam from a plurality of predefined candidate beams. As such, the CB operational mode may determine associated values for the antenna weights from a plurality of predefined candidate values of the antenna weights. [pg. 8 para. 2] According to various examples, at least one beam sweep may be employed to determine one or more beams that have a high beamforming gain... Based on a receive property of pilot signals, it is then possible to identify the appropriate beam… Pairs of beams providing good beamforming gain can then be selected for the wireless communication.)
Regarding Claim 7, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein sending the request for the power level comprises sending the context identifier identifying at least one of a room scale sensing, a short range sensing, or a user activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 3])
Regarding Claim 8, Bengtsson further teaches:
further comprising: sending, to the base station, a request for a sensing grant at a second power level; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving, from the base station based on the second power level, a rejection of the request for the sensing grant. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 10 para. 10])
Regarding Claim 9, Bengtsson further teaches:
receiving, based on the rejection, a third power level from the base station. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 10 para. 10])
Regarding Claim 11, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein receiving the sensing information comprises receiving a reference power level assigned to uplink communications to the base station. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 8], [pg. 8 para. 9])
Regarding Claim 12, Bengtsson further teaches:
further comprising: determining an actual power level as a percentage of the reference power level; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2])
performing the wireless sensing activity at the actual power level. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2])
Regarding Claim 13, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein receiving the sensing information from the base station comprises (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving the sensing information in a service traffic communication. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 14, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein receiving the sensing information from the base station comprises (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving the sensing information in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) communication. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 15, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the UE is a first UE, (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
the wireless sensing activity is a first wireless sensing activity, and further comprising: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving a resource identifier associated with a second wireless sensing activity by a second UE; (Bengtsson – [pg. 9 para. 4] employed for mitigating interference between multiple UEs communicating on the wireless link)
determining a received power from the second UE based on the resource identifier; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
sending the received power to the base station, (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
the base station using the received power to determine a sensing grant for the second UE. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 16, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the base station is a 5G NR gNB. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 17, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the RAT is a 5G NR RAT or a THz RAT. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 18, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein performing the wireless sensing activity comprises: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
transmitting wideband radar signals with a pre-defined waveform; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 7 para. 7] To implement beamforming, an antenna panel can implement phase-coherent transmission in accordance with certain values determined for antenna weights of multiple antenna elements of the antenna panel, thereby creating a transmission directivity.)
detecting reflected signals corresponding to the wideband radar signals. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 4 para. 4] beam sweep may be performed in a wider bandwidth than the one intended for wireless communication; this may allow a wider bandwidth of the radar probing,)
Regarding Claim 22, 32, Bengtsson teaches the following limitations:
A method of wireless communication at a base station, comprising: (Bengtsson – [pg. 2 para. 3])
a memory storing computer-executable instructions; and at least one processor coupled with the memory and configured to execute the computer- executable instructions to: (Bengtsson – [pg. 2 para. 4])
establishing a connection with a user equipment (UE) via a radio access technology (RAT); (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
receiving, from the UE, a request for sensing information, the request including a context identifier identifying an application for the wireless sensing activity or the request identifying a proposed power level for the wireless sensing activity; (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 2], [pg. 8 para. 3] Bengtsson does not explicitly teach “proposed power level”.)
determining sensing information for a wireless sensing activity to be performed by the UE via the RAT, (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 7 para. 2], [pg. 7 para. 5])
the sensing information to be used for power control of the UE during the wireless sensing activity; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
the determined sensing information is based on the context identifier or the proposed power level; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 2], [pg. 8 para. 3])
sending the sensing information to the UE. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
Bengtsson does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Badic, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
proposed power level (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the various transmission powers of Bengtsson with the higher/lower priority associated with higher/lower transmit power of a transmission of Badic in order to increase the probability that the network access node will successfully receive and decode the transmission or restrict power based on exposure power limits (Badic – [col. 41 ln. 27-39], [col. 43 ln. 24-40]).
Regarding Claim 25, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the UE is a first UE, and (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
determining the sensing information for the wireless sensing activity comprises: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
determining a power level for the first UE based at least in part on resource information associated with a second UE. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 26, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein sending the sensing information to the UE includes (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
sending a maximum power level or reference power level for the wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2])
Regarding Claim 27, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein sending the sensing information to the UE includes sending a sensing activity grant including resource information for performance of the wireless sensing activity and a power level. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 10 para. 10])
Regarding Claim 28, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the UE is a first UE, and determining the sensing information for the wireless sensing activity comprises: (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9])
sending a resource identifier associated with the wireless sensing activity to a second UE; (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 2], [pg. 8 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
receiving a received power from the second UE, (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
the received power identifying a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) of the first UE detected at the second UE; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
determining the sensing information based at least in part on the received power. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9])
Regarding Claim 29, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein sending the sensing information to the UE includes sending base station information identifying a plurality of base stations (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4], [pg. 8 para. 2] transmission and/or reception of pilot signals on multiple beams.)
having signals to be measured by the UE when determining a power level for the wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 2], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 4])
Regarding Claim 30, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the sensing information is first sensing information and the wireless sensing activity is a first wireless sensing activity, and (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9])
further comprising: receiving a request for second sensing information for performing a second wireless sensing activity; and (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9])
denying performance of the second wireless sensing activity based at least in part on an expected interference associated with the second wireless sensing activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 8 para. 9])
Regarding Claim 31, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the wireless sensing activity comprises transmitting wideband radar signals with a pre-defined waveform and (Bengtsson – [pg. 4 para. 4], [pg. 7 para. 3], [pg. 7 para. 7])
detecting reflected signals corresponding to the wideband radar signals. (Bengtsson – [pg. 4 para. 4], [pg. 7 para. 3])
Regarding Claim 45, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the wireless sensing activity includes at least one of generating an image of an environment, determining high resolution localization information, facilitating accurate beam tracking, or detecting human activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 3] distance, and/or a size, and/or a speed, and/or a direction of movement, and/or an acceleration of an object providing the reflection can be determined. [pg. 8 para. 4] the one or more directions can point to different points in the environment if compared to the one or more beams. [pg. 14 para. 11] results in an increased resolution of positioning [pg. 14 para. 9] an accuracy of the radar probing)
Regarding Claims 46-49, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein performing the wireless sensing activity comprises performing at least one of a room scale sensing, a short range sensing, or a user activity. (Bengtsson – [pg. 8 para. 3], [pg. 5 para. 3] Radar probing employs radio waves at frequencies in the range of, e.g., 20 GHz - 80 GHz to determine the range, angle or velocity of objects. [pg. 8 para. 6] In a specific example, using a CB operational mode, a transmit beam and/or a receive beam for wireless communication can be identified at the UE. The UE, based on a corresponding beam list, may be aware in what directions the BS can be reached. Then, according to various examples, one or more radar-probing directions that are offset from one or more beams in such a beam list can be used for radar operation with low chance for interference.)
Regarding Claims 50, Bengtsson further teaches:
wherein the pre-defined waveforms are chirp waveforms or orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms. (Bengtsson – [pg. 7 para. 8], [pg. 8 para. 9], [pg. 9 para. 2] Bengtsson does not explicitly teach “chirp waveforms or OFDM waveforms”.)
Bengtsson does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Badic, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
chirp waveforms or OFDM waveforms (Badic – [col. 55 ln. 61-65] Chirp generator 3516c may generate discrete chirps which, when used to control local oscillator 3516c, produces a continuous wave (CW) signal in multiple frequencies that are each generated for a short period of time. [col. 61 ln. 44-53] Aspects described herein can also be applied to different Single Carrier or OFDM flavors (CP-OFDM, SC-FDMA, SC-OFDM, filter bank-based multicarrier (FBMC), OFDMA, etc.) and in particular 3GPP NR (New Radio) by allocating the OFDM carrier data bit vectors to the corresponding symbol resources. Some of the features in this disclosure are defined for the network side, such as Access Points, eNodeBs, New Radio (NR) or next generation Node Bs (gNodeB or gNB, which is typically used in the context of 3GPP fifth generation (5G) communication systems), etc.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmissions of Bengtsson with the chirp/OFDM transmissions of Badic in order to function on various communications systems (Badic – [col. 61 ln. 44-53]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 9-13, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been considered but are not persuasive. The applicant argues, see pages 9-12, that the combination of Bengtsson and Badic does not teach “determining whether an application of the wireless sensing activity is a high priority application; and performing, via the RAT, the wireless sensing activity at a second power level greater than the first power level in response to determining that the application is a high priority application,” and “Bengtsson teaches away from the proposed modification”. The examiner disagrees, Bengtsson clearly teaches “transmit power may be appropriately adjusted, e.g., lowered” and “determine one or more beams that have a high beamforming gain” so “Pairs of beams providing good beamforming gain (proposed power level) can then be selected for the wireless communication.” It is obvious through the combination that if one example is to be lowered then another may be to raise the transmit power when the conditions were appropriate. Badic shows a specific and obvious example of a higher priority associated with higher transmit power of a transmission. A “higher priority” with a “higher transmit power” implies that there is a lower priority with a lower transmit power. The applicant’s arguments seem to suggest that the cited combination is more than an embodiment that takes into consideration a power and priority relationship. The examiner has used only this relationship to be applied to the cited teachings of Bengtsson. Applicant argues that this relationship “does not relate to wireless sensing activity”. The examiner disagrees, Badic [col. 43 ln. 24-40] has been added to the office action to clarify that wireless sensing activity is included in the power/priority relationship.
Applicant argues, see Pages 12-13, that Bengtsson does not teach “receiving, from the UE, a request for sensing information, the request including a context identifier identifying an application for the wireless sensing event or the request identifying a proposed power level for the wireless sensing event” and “determining sensing information… based on the context identifier or the proposed power level,”. The examiner disagrees, Bengtsson clearly teaches “codebook operational mode (context identifier)” and “determine one or more beams that have a high beamforming gain” so “Pairs of beams providing good beamforming gain (proposed power level) can then be selected for the wireless communication.” The instant specification broadly defines “context identifier” as “indicating an application of the wireless sensing activity” which is clearly taught by the more specific citation of a “codebook operational mode”. Claims 22, 32 only require “the context identifier or the “proposed power level” and the examiner understands that this limitation is met by an obvious understanding of the limitations by the teachings of Bengtsson. For the same reasons stated above, the examiner maintains that Badic teaches an explicit example of a “proposed power level” and is cited for Claims 22, 23. Further, the BRI as described by the instant specification [0030], states that the “wireless sensing activity may include transmitting wideband radar signals with a pre-defined waveform and detecting reflected signals corresponding to the radar signals” further allowing a “codebook (CB) operational mode” to map to both “context identifier” and “wireless sensing activity” to be used in “an application of the wireless sensing activity”.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 13, filed 06/22/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 regarding the dependent claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the dependent claims are allowable due to the dependency on the independent claims. As noted above, the examiner maintains Bengtsson in view of Badic teaches the independent claims and therefore the dependent claims remain rejected.
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims is understandable and distinguishable from other inventions.
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 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON JAMES HENSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Resha H. Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/BRANDON JAMES HENSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights