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 .
Status of Amendments
Claims 13 and 16-29 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, and 12 have been amended.
Claims 34 and 35 are newly added.
Claims 1-12, 14, 15, and 30-37 are pending
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
This subject matter eligibility analysis follows the latest guidance for Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
Claims 1 – 12, 14, 15 and 30 – 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1:
Claims 1 – 12, 14, 15 and 30 – 37 are drawn to a system.
Thus, initially, under Step 1 of the analysis, it is noted that the claims are directed towards eligible categories of subject matter.
Step 2A:
Prong 1: Does the Claim recite an Abstract idea, Law of Nature, or Natural Phenomenon?
Claims 1 – 12, 14, 15 and 30 – 37 are exemplary because they require substantially the same operative limitations of the remaining claims (claim 30) (reproduced below.) Examiner has underlined the claim limitations which recite the abstract idea, discussed in detail in the paragraphs that follow.
1. A computer system comprising at least one processor or circuit programmed to perform:
a game control to execute an electronic video game with a virtual space in which a first character of a directing user and a second character of a participating user are present, the first character being controllable with a terminal of the directing user so as to perform actions in the virtual space, and the second character being controllable with a terminal of the participating user so as to perform actions in the virtual space, the electronic video game (i) being executed only in the virtual space and (ii) progressing independently of position coordinates of the terminal of the directing user and position coordinates of the terminal of the participating user;
a start control to control a start of a gathering event upon acceptance of a gathering request operation from the terminal of the directing user, the gathering event being an event that gathers the second character of the participating user at a gathering place in the virtual space;
a map image display control to:
control a display of a map image displaying the gathering place in the virtual space in an identifiable display mode on the terminal of the directing user and the terminal of the participating user; and
a display control to display a fulfillment condition that at least one of the directing user or the participating user must fulfill during the gathering event, whereby a status of progress toward the fulfillment condition is automatically updated as the electronic video game progresses in the virtual space;
an event success/failure determination to determine a success/failure of the gathering event in the virtual space based on at least the progress toward the fulfillment condition;
and a reward giving control to give a reward to at least one of the directing user and the participating user when the gathering event in the virtual space is determined to be a success in the event success/failure determination, the reward comprising at least one of granting a game object located in the virtual space of the electronic video game, unlocking of a game stage in the virtual space, unlocking of a map in the virtual space, or execution of a mini-game in the virtual space.
The claims recite italicized limitations that fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the 2019 PEG, namely, mental processes and certain methods of organizing human activity.
More specifically, under these groupings, the italicized limitations represent concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), and managing interactions between people. For example, the italicized limitations are directed towards a user starting a game event that meet at game locations in the game world and rewarding participants based upon the success or failure of the players fulfilling the game conditions by means of game characters that perform in game actions or inputs. A player or group of players can play this type of game utilizing manual means such as pen or paper such as a conventional table top role-playing type game.
Prong 2: Does the Claim recite additional elements that integrate the exception in to a practical application of the exception?
Although the claims recite additional limitations, these limitations do not integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. For example, the claims require additional limitations as follow, (emphasis added): terminals, a display, a processor, electronic video game.
These additional limitations do not represent an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Nor do they apply the exception using a particular machine, (MPEP 2106.05(b)). Furthermore, they do not effect a transformation. (MPEP 2106.05(c)). Rather, these additional limitations amount to an instruction to “apply” the judicial exception using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, since the additional limitations, individually or in combination, are indistinguishable from a computer used as a tool to perform the abstract idea, the analysis continues to Step 2B, below.
Step 2B:
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they amount to conventional and routine computer implementation and mere instructions for implementing the abstract idea on generic computing devices.
For example, as pointed out above, the claimed invention recites additional elements facilitating implementation of the abstract idea. Applicant has claimed computer system comprising a terminals, a display, a processor and electronic video game. However, all of these elements viewed individually and as a whole, are indistinguishable from conventional computing elements known in the art. Therefore, the additional elements fail to supply additional elements that yield significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
As the Alice court cautioned, citing Flook, patent eligibility cannot depend simply on the draftsman’s art. Here, amending the claims with generic computing elements does not (in this Examiner’s opinion), confer eligibility.
Regarding the Berkheimer decision, Wolf (US 11,011,069) establishes that these additional elements are generic:
(2) Computer implemented games are a well-known category of games that allow a player to interact with a computing device to cause the processor to perform certain functions and typically display a result on a screen or other display device. Different types of games have evolved from classical arcade games into games that can be played on a handheld device such as a smartphone, tablet or personal computer. Some games are also connected to the Internet and the player can play against or compare scores with other users in multiplayer mode. (Wolf 1:15 – 25)
Therefore, these elements fail to supply additional elements that yield significantly more than the underlying abstract idea. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea).
Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Moreover, the claims do not recite improvements to another technology or technical field. Nor, do the claims improve the functioning of the underlying computer itself -- they merely recite generic computing elements. Furthermore, they do not effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing: the underlying computing elements remain the same.
Concerning preemption, the Federal Circuit has said in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., V. Sequenom, Inc., (Fed Cir. June 12, 2015):
The Supreme Court has made clear that the principle of preemption is the basis for the judicial exceptions to patentability. Alice, 134 S. Ct at 2354 (“We have described the concern that drives this exclusionary principal as one of pre-emption”). For this reason, questions on preemption are inherent in and resolved by the § 101 analysis. The concern is that patent law not inhibit further discovery by improperly tying up the future use of these building blocks of human ingenuity.” Id. (internal quotations omitted). In other words, patent claims should not prevent the use of the basic building blocks of technology—abstract ideas, naturally occurring phenomena, and natural laws. While preemption may signal patent ineligible subject matter, the absence of complete preemption does not demonstrate patent eligibility. In this case, Sequenom’s attempt to limit the breadth of the claims by showing alternative uses of cffDNA outside of the scope of the claims does not change the conclusion that the claims are directed to patent ineligible subject matter. Where a patent’s claims are deemed only to disclose patent ineligible subject matter under the Mayo framework, as they are in this case, preemption concerns are fully addressed and made moot. (Emphasis added.)
For these reasons, it appears that the claims are not patent-eligible under 35 USC §101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 -9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 30 and 34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grand Theft Auto: Heists update (hereinafter “GTAH”), released 3/10/2015 as evidenced by “GTA Online: Doomsday Heist Act #1 with 4 Players (Elite and Criminal Mastermind IV” posted by GTA Series Videos (Hereinafter “GSV”)
As per claim 1, GTAH discloses:
a game control to execute an electronic video game with a virtual space in which a first character of a directing user and a second character of a participating user are present, the first character being controllable with a terminal of the directing user so as to perform actions in the virtual space, and the second character being controllable with a terminal of the participating user so as to perform actions in the virtual space, the electronic video game (i) being executed only in the virtual space and (ii) progressing independently of position coordinates of the terminal of the directing user and position coordinates of the terminal of the participating user; (GTA a lobby setup screen wherein first and second players participate in a multiplayer game that is solely online) (GSV 12:29 – 12:34)
a start control to control a start of a gathering event upon acceptance of a gathering request operation from the terminal of the directing user, the gathering event being an event that gathers the second character of the participating user at a gathering place in the virtual space; (GTA displays a client invite option to invite other players who then join the host on a mission to accomplish a game mission at various designated locations) (GSV 12:30)
a map image display control to:
control a display of a map image displaying the gathering place in the virtual space in an identifiable display mode on the terminal of the directing user and the terminal of the participating user; and (GTAH discloses the display of a mini-map or radar type map that directs players to goal destinations and also depicts highlighted routes to goal destinations where players are to gather to accomplish a task) (GSV 13:05 – 13:08)
a display control to display a fulfillment condition that at least one of the directing user or the participating user must fulfill during the gathering event, whereby a status of progress toward the fulfillment condition is automatically updated as the electronic video game progresses in the virtual space; (GTAH discloses automatically updating player goals and displaying them). As the players play the game mission updates are displayed such as “go to LS County Coroners” (GSV 14:35) and are updated with new directives such as “steal the intel” as the previous ones are accomplished (GSV 16:42)
an event success/failure determination to determine a success/failure of the gathering event in the virtual space based on at least the progress toward the fulfillment condition; (GTAH discloses the fulfillment conditions during a setup screen “Team 1 collect a dead agent’s cache of data from the morgue (i.e. destination). Team 2 recovers the agents stolen helicopter”. (GSV 12:28 – 12:30) GTAH also discloses challenges that are applied to the mission (i.e. fulfillment conditions). As the players play the game mission updates are displayed such as “go to LS County Coroners” (GSV 14:35) and are updated with new directives such as “steal the intel” as the previous ones are accomplished (GSV 16:42)
and a reward giving control to give a reward to at least one of the directing user and the participating user when the gathering event in the virtual space is determined to be a success in the event success/failure determination, the reward comprising at least one of granting a game object located in the virtual space of the electronic video game, unlocking of a game stage in the virtual space, unlocking of a map in the virtual space, or execution of a mini-game in the virtual space. (GTAH discloses the player working together to find a piece of intel and being awarded/unlocking the intel data as well as being rewarded in game currency) (GSV 18:13, 1:15:00 – 1:17:00)
As per claim 2, wherein the start control includes controlling the start of the gathering event, the map image display control includes controlling the display of the map image related to the virtual space, and the event success/failure determination includes determining the success/failure of the gathering event using a position of the second character operated by the participating user. (GTAH discloses the starting of the mission and all players working together to fulfill the job or heist) (GSV 13:08)
As per claim 3, the start control includes setting the fulfillment condition of the gathering event, a condition related to the actions of the second character of the participating user in the virtual space taken before the second character gathers at the gathering place, and the event success/failure determination includes determining whether the second character of the participating user satisfies the fulfillment condition. (GTAH discloses multiple players performing different tasks such as breaking into the LS Coroner’s Office (specific location) (GSV 15:44) and another player or players stealing a helicopter to go to a specific location such as LS Coroners Office (specific location) (GSV 18:36 – 19:50), wherein the success depends upon the second player completing the task)
As per claim 4, wherein the start control includes setting the fulfillment condition for each participating user based on intimacy between the participating user and the directing user. (GTAH discloses one player as the host and other players being apart of his crew, thus players that receive tasks receive them based upon being on the same team (i.e. intimacy)) (GSV 12:28)
As per claim 5, wherein, the start control includes displaying, upon acceptance of the gathering request operation, the fulfillment condition of the gathering event with the gathering place on the terminal of a predetermined target user to announce execution of the gathering event, accepting a participation operation from the terminal of the target user, and controlling the start of the gathering event with the target user who has performed the participation operation as the participating user. (GTAH discloses initial setup, wherein players accept game invites to play and join the team based multiplayer game) (GSV 12:30-12:34)
As per claim 6, wherein the at least one processor or circuit is programmed to display a detail screen in response to a selection operation selecting the gathering place or a vicinity thereof in the map image on the terminal of the participating user that includes the fulfillment condition and a fulfilled status of the fulfillment condition by the second character (GTAH discloses a mini map screen that depicts each player’s destination and route and if they are at the end destination. Thus, it displays the fulfillment condition and a status of the route or destination and if the player fulfilled the current task) (GSV 13:50-13:59)
As per claim 7, wherein the at least one processor or circuit is programmed to display a detail screen in response to a selection operation selecting the gathering place or a vicinity thereof in the map image on the terminal of the participating user that includes at least one of a remaining distance to the gathering place from the second character of the participating user in the virtual space and a position of the participating user in a ranking of the remaining distance of each participating user. (GTAH discloses the remaining distance to the end destination) (GSV 13:22-14:07)
As per claim 8, wherein the event success/failure determination includes determining the success/failure of the gathering event using the position of the second character operated by the participating user before a given gathering time or at the given gathering time. (GTAH discloses the use of a timer wherein the player each have to accomplish a goal of getting to a destination before a timer runs out such as getting to a select place to hack a signal) (GSV 41:00 – 42:00)
As per claim 9, wherein the at least one processor or circuit is programmed to display detail screen in response to a selection operation selecting the gathering place or a vicinity thereof in the map image on the terminal of the participating user that includes a gathering time and a remaining time to the gathering time. (GTAH discloses a gathering countdown timer wherein a player must perform a task before the timer runs out, thus at the end of the countdown timer, that current time will be the end gathering time) (GSV 40:42)
As per claim 11, wherein each of the user is associated with a team to belong to, and the start control includes controlling the start of the gathering event with a user on a same team as the directing user as the participating user upon acceptance of the gathering request operation. (GSV 12:28 – 12:30)
As per claim 12, wherein the at least one processor or circuit is programmed to display a detail screen in response to a selection operation selecting the gathering place or a vicinity thereof in the map image on the terminal of the directing user that includes a gathering status of each participating user based on a remaining distance to the gathering place from each character associated with the respective participating user in the virtual space. (GTAH discloses a displaying of a mini-map that displays each players location with respect to teammates and the final destination, such as the player denoted by an arrow and the second player denoted by a circled #2) (GSV 13:42)
As per claim 14, wherein the start control includes setting the gathering place based on an instruction from the directing user. (GTAH discloses a host player selecting and starting the mission and thus the destinations of the mission will be set for the players to travel thereto) (GSV 6:10-14:39)
As per claim 15, wherein the map image display control includes changing a display mode of the gathering place in the map image in accordance with a remaining distance to the gathering place from the second character of the participating user for the terminal of each participating user. (GTAH displays a mini map that is updated with a real-time remaining distance on each players mini-map) (GSV 13:42)
As per claims 30, the computer system as defined in claim 1;and a user terminal configured to be able to communicate with the computer system. (GTAH displays a mini map that is updated with a real-time remaining distance on each players mini-map) (GSV entire video)
As per claim 34,
wherein the at least one processor or circuit is programmed to perform control for a display of a detail screen in response to a selection operation selecting the gathering place or a vicinity thereof in the map image on the terminal of the directing user or on the terminal of the participating user, wherein the detail screen displayed in response to the selection operation on the terminal of the directing user is different from the detail screen displayed in response to the selection operation on the terminal of the participating user. (GTAH discloses the displaying of different main details displays and different details in the mini-map of the first and participating users such as a player on team #1 vs team #2) (GSV 15:14)
As per claim 35, wherein the display control further includes displaying a direction display body that points towards the gathering place in the virtual space. (GTAH discloses the displaying of a mini-map with a direction body such as an arrow and highlighted route, that points to a gathering place) (GSV 15:14)
As per claim 36, wherein the fulfillment condition specifies at least one of a type and the number of enemy characters to defeat, a place to visit in the game space, an item to acquire, or a game stage to clear. (GTAH discloses automatically updating player goals and displaying them). As the players play the game mission updates are displayed such as “go to LS County Coroners” (GSV 14:35) and are updated with new directives such as “steal the intel” as the previous ones are accomplished (GSV 16:42)
As per claim 37, wherein the display control further includes displaying a gathering time and remaining distance to the gathering place. (GSV discloses the displaying of a countdown timer and a remaining distance (GSV 39:05)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 10 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grand Theft Auto: Heists update (hereinafter “GTAH”), released 3/10/2015 as evidenced by GTA Online: Doomsday Heist Act #1 with 4 Players (Elite and Criminal Mastermind IV” posted by GTA Series Videos (Hereinafter “GSV”) in view of LI (US 20190126151).
As per claim 10, GTAH fails to disclose:
wherein the map image display control includes changing a display mode of the gathering place in the map image in accordance with a remaining time to the gathering time for the terminal of each participating user.
However, in a similar field of endeavor wherein a mini map is displayed to the user, LI discloses the modification of a mini map with respect to a timer, such the timer can be removing old sound markers so that the map stays current (LI 0064).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify GTAH in view of Li to use a known technique to modify similar devices in the same way by updating a mini map in accordance to a countdown timer. This would ensure that the map displaying various locations is up to date for a player and current.
As per claim 31, wherein the display mode of the gathering place in the map image does not change in accordance with the remaining time to the gathering time for the terminal of the directing user, while the display mode of the gathering place in the map image changes in accordance with the remaining time to the gathering time for the terminal of the participating user. (Combination of GTAH in view LI as applied to claim 10, wherein if the host player is motionless the map will not update, however, if the second player is moving towards the destination the mini map will need to be updated to reflect current location data)
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grand Theft Auto: Heists update (hereinafter “GTAH”), released 3/10/2015 as evidenced by GTA Online: Doomsday Heist Act #1 with 4 Players (Elite and Criminal Mastermind IV” posted by GTA Series Videos (Hereinafter “GSV”) in view of “Partying” posted 10/25/2019 on Path of Exile Wiki (hereinafter “Partying”).
As per claim 32, GTAH fails to disclose:
wherein the reward includes granting a game object with a predetermined rareness degree, based on a number of the participating users who arrived at the gathering place as the reward.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Partying discloses a multiplayer game mechanic wherein the size of the party affects the a degree of rarity of items that are dropped (Partying page 1 - 2).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify GTAH in view of Partying by means of utilizing a similar rarity mechanic that drops items of varying degrees of rarity based upon how many players are in the party accomplishing a task. This would make the group play mechanic more desirable as it would promote more players attempting to create larger parties to have a greater chance of being rewarded with better or items
Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grand Theft Auto: Heists update (hereinafter “GTAH”), released 3/10/2015 as evidenced by GTA Online: Doomsday Heist Act #1 with 4 Players (Elite and Criminal Mastermind IV” posted by GTA Series Videos (Hereinafter “GSV”) in view of “Open Wheel Races Week (February 2020) posted 2/29/2020 (hereinafter Open Wheel Races”
As per claim 33, GSV fails to specifically disclose: wherein the reward includes a coupon.
However, Open Wheel Races discloses that in the game GTA, an online game event is used to offer the players bonuses by means of discounts or coupons on game items or gear (Open Wheel Races, page 1 -2).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify GTAH in view of Open Wheel Races, to use a known technique to modify similar devices in the same way by means of awarded users of the game system coupons that are redeemable for discounts on game items. This would be beneficial as it would incentivize players to support the in game economy with the ability to purchase items that may be otherwise unobtainable for them.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2/17/2026 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.
Regarding the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 101, the Applicant argues:
In response, claim 1 recites "a display control to display a fulfillment condition that at least one of the directing user or the participating user must fulfill during the gathering event, whereby a status of progress toward the fulfillment condition is automatically updated as the electronic video game progresses in the virtual space." This feature is specific to the electronic video game, and does not represent manual means such as pen or paper such as a conventional table top role-playing type game because the display is electronic and automatically updated.
Further, Applicant is amending claim 1 to recite "the electronic video game being
executed only in the virtual space." This clarifies that the real world is not represented in the video game.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner incorporates the previous Examiner rebuttal as it still applies in light of the Applicant’s arguments.
“The Examiner notes that despite the amendments to the claims, the claimed subject matter can be performed in the human mind. The Examiner notes that the previous comparison to a table-top role playing game being played between game players still applies. The Examiner notes that the claims recite the mere performing of generic actions in a virtual game space which are applied to a general technological environment (i.e. terminals). The Examiner is notes that with the exception of utilizing a terminal (conventional technological environment), a user directing a virtual character to perform an action in a virtual space is similar to a group of players playing conventional role playing game that utilizes a “virtual environment” hosted by a dungeon master utilizing a mental process and pen and paper. Competing players command their characters to perform actions within the virtual game and those actions are recorded and acted out or played out with respect to other player characters in the game wherein players further may utilize pen and paper to create various displays of “detail screens” and reward players of the game by means of as an example, by further unlocking of virtual game stages or granting of virtual objects to imaginary game characters of the table-top role playing game.” The Examiner further notes that the limitations directed towards displaying of status updates as the game progress can clearly be accomplished via pen and paper by a human. The Examiner maintains the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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 ROSS A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-5911. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am - 4pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/RAW/Examiner, Art Unit 3715 5/27/2026
/KANG HU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights