CTNF 18/087,391 CTNF 95381 DETAILED ACTION Notice of AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on 12/22/2022, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 18-22 are withdrawn. Claims 1-10 and 13-17 are rejected. Claims 1-17 are objected to. Election/Restrictions 08-06 AIA Claim s 18-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/17/2025 . Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1-17 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “the sample holder holding at least one analyte sample”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘the sample holder for holding at least one analyte sample’. Claim 1 recites “the cameras, the Raman excitation sources, and the illumination sources”. For the sake of uniformity in terminology, consider rephrasing to ‘the at least two cameras, the at least to Raman laser excitation sources, the at least two illumination sources’. Claim 1 recites “a computer/processor”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘a computer processor’. Claim 1 recites “the system is structured”. For the sake of uniformity in claim terminology, consider rephrasing to ‘the portable multimodal optical sensing system is structured’. Claim 5 recites “each of the at least two cameras”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘each camera of the at least two cameras’. Claim 7 recites “at least one of the at least two color cameras”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘at least a color camera of the at two color cameras’. Claim 8 recites “each of the at least two Raman excitation sources”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘each Raman excitation source of the at least two Raman excitation sources’. Claim 8 is objected to for missing a period at the end thereof. Claim 9 recites “at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples.” and claim 10 recites “at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 1064 nm laser for high-fluorescence analyte samples”. Because fluorescence is not measured on a universal, absolute scale with fixed high and low values, the interpretation of "high" or "low" is specific to the particular experiment, instrument settings, and the fluorophore being used and in the context of the claimed invention, a person of ordinary skill would have no difficult determining what laser to use for what sample, consider rephrasing the limitation in claim 9 to ‘at least a Raman laser excitation source of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for exciting a first plurality of fluorescent analyte samples’ and the limitation in claim 10 to ‘at least a Raman laser excitation source of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 1064 nm laser for exciting a second plurality of fluorescence analyte samples’. Claim 12 recites “the illumination sources”. For the sake of uniformity in terminology, consider rephrasing to ‘the at least two illumination sources’. Claim 13 recites “examine the respective analyte samples”. For the sake of uniformity in claim terminology, consider rephrasing to ‘examine the at least one analyte sample’ or to ‘examine one or more respective analyte samples of the at least one analyte sample’. Claim 13 recites “determine the components and the analysis protocol to examine”. Regarding “the components” it’s noted that according to MPEP 2173.05(e) “Inherent components of elements recited have antecedent basis in the recitation of the elements themselves”. However, in this case consider providing explicit antecedent basis to improve clarity beyond the minimum required under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) by rephrasing to ‘determine the analysis protocol and one or more components of the portable multimodal optical sensing system with which to examine…’. Claim 14 recites “wherein if a bacterial species or chemical contaminant is present, the system is structured to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant” which is definite because a person of ordinary skill would understand that the system is structured to identify the bacterial species when the bacterial species is present and simultaneously structured to identify the chemical contaminant when the chemical species is present and not that configuration of the system varies depending on the contingent presence or absence of the bacterial species or on the contingent presence of absence of the chemical contaminant. However, for the sake of clarity and to avoid grammatical awkwardness, consider rephrasing to ‘wherein the computer processor is configured to identify a bacterial species when the bacterial species is present and to identify a chemical contaminant when the chemical contaminant is present’. Claim 15 recites “wherein computer/processor is structured to use embedded AI to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant in the analyte sample”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘wherein the computer processor is embedded with artificial intelligence AI and is configured to identify the bacterial species when the bacterial species is present in the analyte sample using the embedded AI and to identify the chemical contaminant when the chemical contaminant is present in the analyte sample using the embedded AI’. Claim 16 recites “the computer/processor is structured to determine whether a bacterial species or chemical contaminant is present in the at least one analyte sample”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to “the computer processor is structured to determine whether or not a bacterial species is present in the at least one analyte sample and to determine whether or not a chemical contaminant is present in the at least one analyte sample’. Claim 17 recites “the computer/processor is structured to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant in the analyte sample in real time”. For the sake of clarity, consider rephrasing to ‘the computer processor is embedded with artificial intelligence AI and is configured to identify the bacterial species when the bacterial species is present in the analyte sample in real time using the embedded AI and to identify the chemical contaminant when the chemical contaminant is present in the analyte sample in real time using the embedded AI’. Claims dependent on an objected base claim are objected to because any claim in dependent form is construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 6-8 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franjic (US20180180550A1) in view of Poteet (US20220381681) in view of Wissmann (US20180372648) . As to claim 1, Franjic teaches a portable multimodal optical sensing system (a portable multi-modal tissue imaging system in [0017]), the system comprising: a sample holder (sample holder 120 in [0091]) connected to an XY moving base (motorized positioning assembly 14 in [0060], which recites “the motorized positioning assembly 14 has three translation stages for moving a sample 18 along three perpendicular axes of travel (X,Y,Z)”), the sample holder (sample holder 120) holding at least one analyte sample (sample 122 in [0091]); at least two cameras (integrated cameras in [0095], which recites “integrated cameras that are powered and controlled by the control system 106”); at least two Raman laser excitation sources (lasers 146 and 148 in [0096], see also [0048], which recites “Raman probes with static laser excitation beam”); a first spectrometer (spectrometer 144 in [0094]); at least two illumination sources (illumination sources 134 and 136 in [0096]); a portable base (a sample system base-plate 100 in [0092]) and housing (additional enclosure 300 in [0099])) at least partially enclosing the XY moving base (motorized positioning assembly 14), the cameras (integrated cameras), the Raman excitation sources (laser 146 and 148), and the illumination sources (illumination sources 134 and 136); and, a computer/processor (main control system 106 in [0091]) in communication with and controlling the XY moving base (see [0091], which recites “electrical power and control signals for motorized stage driver 104 are provided through a main control system 106”) , the cameras (see Fig. 3), the Raman excitation sources (see [0096], which recites “lasers 146 and 148 are controlled through a guide laser driver 150 which is powered and controlled with the control system 106”), and the illumination sources (see [0096], which recites “illumination sources 134 and 136 provide illumination for the wide-field and narrow- field microscopes 130 and 132 and they are controlled through an illumination controller 138 which is powered and controlled with the control system 106”); the system (portable multi-modal tissue imaging system ) is structured so that the computer/processor (main control system 106) directs the XY moving stage (motorized positioning assembly 14) to enable at least one of the cameras (integrated cameras) to scan the at least one analyte sample (sample 112) (see [0009], which recites “the system includes a computer controller connected to the motorized positioning mechanism and the two or more bio-imaging probes. The computer is programmed for controlling motorized positioning mechanism to move the sample holder having the sample located thereon to positions in the field of view of each bio-imaging probe where the sample can be analyzed individually by each of the bio-imaging probes”) so that the computer/processor (main control system 106) determines an analysis protocol (analysis protocol is interpreted as one or more steps in an analysis method) (see claim 2, which recites “said computer controller includes a user interface to facilitate a user obtaining, using a designated bio-imaging probe, imaging data of the sample to be visually displayed, and used by an input selection means for selecting a volume of interest of the sample to be imaged by said at least one additional bio-imaging probe”), the XY moving stage (motorized positioning assembly 14) being configured to move in accordance with the analysis protocol so that the at least one analyte sample (sample 122) is analyzed (see claim 4, which recites “said computer controller includes pre-defined algorithms that facilitate sample analysis by executing pre-determined sequence of selections of sample volumes of interest, sample positioning steps, data acquisitions by the bio-imaging probes, and data analysis”) (see also Fig. 10). Franjic doesn’t explicitly teach at least two Raman spectrometers and Frankiic also doesn’t explicitly teach a UV light. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Poteet (US20220381681) teaches at least two Raman spectrometers (see claim 1, which recites “a first miniature spectrometer to generate a first spectral output based on receiving a first light channel from a sample; a second miniature spectrometer to generate a second spectral output based on receiving a second light channel from the sample”) (see claim 5, which recites “wherein the first miniature spectrometer and the second miniature spectrometer comprise two of … a Raman spectrometer). Poteet further teaches an illumination sources comprising at least a UV light (see [0032], which recites “the UV source 310 generates UV light 311”)(UV stands for ultra violet). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic by incorporating the UV source disclosed by Poteet and the second Raman spectrometer disclosed by Poteet such the portable multimodal optical sensing system comprises at least two Raman spectrometer and the at least two illimitation sources comprise at least a UV light with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of redundancy in case the first spectrometer fails, the second spectrometer keeps the system fully functional (MPEP 2144.04 Vi. B.). Franjic in view of Poteet doesn’t teach the illumination sources comprising at least an analyte sample backlight. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Wissmann (US20180372648) teaches an illumination source (spectrally-switchable lighting source 449 in [0067]) comprising at least an analyte sample backlight ((see [0067], which recites “spectrally-switchable lighting source 449 as an active backdrop, …, that may be provided by the light panel assembly 450 to provide spectrally-switchable backlighting”) (see also [0045], which recites “the specimen containers 102 may be any generally transparent or translucent container, such as a blood collection tube, test tube, sample cup, cuvette, or other generally clear glass or plastic container configured to contain a specimen 212.”) (se also Fig. 4A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet by incorporating the analyte sample backlight as disclosed by Wissman such the portable multimodal optical sensing system comprises at least two illumination sources comprising an analyte sample backlight with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of improving measurement accuracy by enhancing signal to noise ration and reducing interference from ambient light via uniform, controlled illumination through the sample with the analyte sample backlight. As to claim 2, Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the computer/processor is external to the portable base and housing. Because Wissman like Franjic also teaches a computer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet by rearranging the computer/processor such that the computer/processor is external to the portable base and housing as illustrated by Wissman Fig. 4A, see computer/processor (computer 143) external to the portable base and housing (housing 446) with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of preventing overheating of the computer/processor with computer otherwise in the portable base and housing. As to claim 3, Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the at least one analyte sample (sample 122) in the holder (sample holder 120) comprises a macro-scale analyte sample (tissue sample in [0008] of Franjic) (see MPEP 2115). As to claim 6, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the at least two cameras (integrated cameras) comprise at least two color cameras (see [0092] of Wismann). As to claim 7, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein at least one of the at least two color cameras comprise a multi-band bandpass filter (see [0084] of Wissmann, which recites “selectable band-pass filters may be used to capture images at multiple selected wavelengths”). As to claim 8, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein each of the at least two Raman excitation sources (Lasers 146 and 148) has a separate laser probe (see [0048] of Franjjic, which recites “Raman probes with static laser excitation beam”). As to claim 13, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the computer/processor (main control system 106) is structured to use embedded AI to determine the components and the analysis protocol (see [0072] of Franjic, which recites, user selection can be facilitated by using predetermined algorithms and other computer inputs such as machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) instructions. In case predetermined algorithms, machine learning, and AI algorithms perform the majority of the sampling volume definition process, the user interface can establish a simple form that includes only the steps such as inserting and removing a sample into the multi-modal imaging system and activating the imaging process”) to examine the respective analyte samples (see [0005] of Poteet which recites “the processor is configured to execute instructions to perform data fusion of the first and second spectral outputs to generate fused data, and to apply artificial intelligence (AI) of an AI module to the fused data to identify a pathogen, biomarker, or any compound from the sample”). As to claim 14, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein if a bacterial species or chemical contaminant is present, (the system portable multi-modal tissue imaging system) is structured to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant (see [0015] of Poteet, which recites “the present design relates generally to the field of chemical detection, inspection, and classification. The present design provides detection of pathogens (e.g., coronavirus, bacterial pathogens such as E. coli, salmonella, listeria, etc.) in a sample (e.g., biological sample, saliva) with high accuracy and sensitivity with an optical instrument”) (in light of the specification, the structure in the system for performing the claimed function is the computer processor). As to claim 15, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1 wherein computer/processor (main control system 106) is structured to use embedded AI to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant in the analyte sample (see [0005] of Poteet which recites “the processor is configured to execute instructions to perform data fusion of the first and second spectral outputs to generate fused data, and to apply artificial intelligence (AI) of an AI module to the fused data to identify a pathogen, biomarker, or any compound from the sample”). As to claim 16, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches system of claim 1 wherein the computer/processor (main control system 106) is structured to determine whether a bacterial species or chemical contaminant is present in the at least one analyte sample (see [0005] of Poteet which recites “the processor is configured to execute instructions to perform data fusion of the first and second spectral outputs to generate fused data, and to apply artificial intelligence (AI) of an AI module to the fused data to identify a pathogen, biomarker, or any compound from the sample”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franjic (US20180180550A1) in view of Poteet (US20220381681) and Wissmann (US20180372648) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Robinson (US20080310692) . As to claim 4, Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t teach a well plate or a Petri dish. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Robinson teaches a Petri dish (see [0038], which recites” a Petri dish 6 containing the sample is placed between the laser 15 and a detection screen 35, and the forward-scattered light intercepted by the detection screen 35”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman by incorporating the petri dish disclosed by Robinson such that the sample holder comprises a Petri dish with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of effectively preventing contamination by detecting bacterial colonies grown directly in the Petri dish which is desirable in real time detection . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franjic (US20180180550A1) in view of Poteet (US20220381681) and Wissmann (US20180372648) as applied to claims 1 and 15, in further view of Gibbons (US20120309636) . As to claim 5, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t explicitly teach that each of the at least two cameras has separate imaging acquisition apertures. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Gibbons (US20120309636) teaches a camera having a separate image acquisition aperture (see Fig. 101). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman by incorporating the camera disclosed by Gibbons such that each of the at least two cameras has separate imaging acquisition apertures with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of effectively improving image sharpness and measurement accuracy by reducing stray light and optical noise by controlling the amount of light reaching each of the two cameras with separate image acquisition apertures. As to claim 17, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 15. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t explicitly teach that the computer/processor is structured to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant in the analyte sample in real time. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Gibbons (US20120309636) identifying a chemical contaminant in an analyte sample in real time (see [0187], which recites “the devices and systems herein can provide an effective means for real-time detection of analytes present in a bodily fluid from a subject”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman by by programming the identifying a chemical contaminant in an analyte sample in real time disclosed by Gibbons such that the computer/processor is structured to identify the bacterial species or chemical contaminant in the analyte sample in real time with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of enabling the information necessary for immediate corrective actions against pathogenic bacteria and avoiding delays and costs associated with the delays . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franjic (US20180180550A1) in view of Poteet (US20220381681)and Wissmann (US20180372648) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Cooper (US 8,570,507) . As to claim 9, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t teach explicitly that the at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Cooper (US 8,570,507) teaches at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples (see column 8, which recites “FIG.1. This figure shows a schematic diagram of a Raman spectrometer … comprising a 785nm DBR diode laser”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet incorporating the 785 nm laser source of Cooper such that at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of effectively reducing fluorescence enabling reliable Raman measurements across a wide range of samples. As to claim 10, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t teach that at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 1064 nm laser for high-fluorescence analyte samples. In the analogous art of providing optical sensing systems, Cooper (US 8,570,507) teaches at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 785 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples that at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 1064 nm laser for high-fluorescence analyte samples (see column 9, which recites “FT-Raman spectrum of dimethylglyoxime acquired using a 1064 nm laser”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the portable multimodal optical sensing system disclosed by Franjic in view of Poteet incorporating the 1064 nm laser source of Cooper such that the at least one of the at least two Raman laser excitation sources comprises a 1064 nm laser source for low-fluorescence analyte samples with a reasonable expectation of success for the benefit of effectively reducing fluorescence enabling reliable Raman measurements across a wide range of samples . Allowable Subject Matter 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 11-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As to claim 11, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t teach that the UV light comprises a vertically adjustable UV ring light. As to claim 12, Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman teaches the system of claim 1. Franjiic in view of Poteet in view of Wissman doesn’t teach that the illumination sources further comprise a vertically adjustable white ring light. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BORTOLI whose telephone number is (571)270-3179. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM till 6 PM EST Monday through Thursday. 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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571)272-1254. 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. /JONATHAN BORTOLI/Examiner, Art Unit 1797 /JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 2 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 3 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 4 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 5 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 6 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 7 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 8 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 9 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 10 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 11 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 12 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 13 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 14 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 15 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 16 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 17 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 18 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 19 Art Unit: 1797 Application/Control Number: 18/087,391 Page 20 Art Unit: 1797