CTNF 18/161,829 CTNF 88372 DETAILED ACTION The following Office Action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination filed on April 15, 2026. Claims 1, 3-12, and 14-22 are currently pending. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 15, 2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment Concerning the “Specification Objection and Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 112” section on page 7 of the Applicant’s Response filed on April 15, 2026, the amendment to the Specification to change the name of the title, and the amendments to claims 4, 15, and 16 to address the issues of indefiniteness included in the After-Final Amendment filed on March 10, 2026 and entered in the Advisory Action filed April 8, 2026 has obviated the necessity of the objection to the Specification and the rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. §112(b). Therefore, the objection and rejections are withdrawn. Response to Arguments Concerning the “Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 section on pages 7-11, the applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. The applicant first argues that element 140 of Escudero is not a guidewire tube, arguing that Escudero identifies the element as a mating piece, and that the guidewire lumen is identified as element 130, which runs through the device. However, the examiner asserts that the claims do not recite a guidewire tube. Rather, the claims recite a distal end tube through which a guide wire can pass, wherein the mating piece of element 140 may be described as such given it is a tube positioned at the distal end of the device (Escudero; Figure 41B; 140), through which a guide wire may pass (Escudero; Figure 42; 128). The applicant then argues that the Escudero reference does not teach the structural arrangement of a distal end tube that is attached to a side surface of the outer shaft, provides a passage through which a guide wire can pass, and has a distal end portion that extends a distal side from a distal end of the cutter, with the sensors mounted on the distal end portion. However, the examiner asserts that the Escudero reference has not been used to teach the specific structural arrangement of the distal end tube. The Escudero reference has merely been utilized to modify the Tada reference to include the one or more first sensors mounted on the distal end tube located on a distal side of the cutter (Escudero; Figure 41B; 144), which the Escudero does teach. The specific structural arrangement of the tube itself is taught in the Tada reference, wherein the Tada reference shows the distal tube attached to a side surface of the outer shaft and having a distal end portion that extends to a distal side from a distal end of the cutter (Tada; Figure 2; 35). The applicant additionally argues that secondary references do not cure the deficiencies of the Tada and Escudero combination. However, the independent claims have not been found to be deficient in any teachings with regards to the independent claims. Therefore, the rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. §103 stand. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) . Concerning claims 1 and 3, the Tada et al. prior art reference teaches a medical device for removing an object in a body cavity (Figures 1-11; 10), comprising: a rotatable shaft (Figure 2; 21); an outer shaft surrounding the drive shaft (Figure 2; 30); a distal end tube attached to a side surface of a distal end portion of the outer shaft such that a distal end portion of the distal end tube extends to a distal side from a distal end of the cutter (Figure 2; 34) and through which a guide wire can pass (Figure 2; 35), a cutter attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft and by which the object is cut (Figure 3; 40), but it does not specifically teach one or more first sensors mounted on the distal end tube, wherein each of the one or more first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Escudero reference teaches a similar medical device for removing an object in a body cavity (100), comprising: a rotatable shaft (Figure 2A; 114) and a distal end tube attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft (Figure 42; 140) and through which a guide wire can pass (Figure 42; 128); a cutter attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft and by which the object is cut (Figure 2A; 110); and one or more first sensors mounted on a distal end of the distal end tube and located on a distal side of the cutter (Figure 41B; 144), wherein each of the first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue ([¶ 0308], transducer 144 may be an electrode for sensing the impedance of contacted tissue, therein detecting contact ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end tube of the Tada reference include the one or more first sensors mounted on the distal end tube and located on a distal side of the cutter, wherein each of the one or more first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue as in the Escudero reference to allow the device to indicate the progression of debulking or proximity of the cutter to a vessel wall or other objects or biological tissue (Escudero; [¶ 0308]). Concerning claims 8 and 20, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claims 1 and 11, wherein the Tada reference further teaches a guide portion that passes through the drive shaft and protrudes from the cutter toward a distal direction (Figure 2; 51). Although the guide portion does not teach a fifth sensor disposed at a distal end of the guide portion, a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would find it obvious to have said guide portion include an additional sensor, defining a fifth sensor, to further allow the device to indicate the progression of debulking or proximity of the cutter to a vessel wall or other objects or biological tissue (Escudero; [¶ 0308]). Concerning claims 9 and 10, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 1, wherein the Escudero reference further teaches the one or more first sensors being a pressure sensor or an optical sensor configured to detect infrared rays (Escudero; [¶ 0264]). Concerning claims 11 and 14, the Tada et al. prior art reference teaches a medical system for removing an object in a body cavity, comprising: a medical device (Figures 1-11; 10), including: a rotatable shaft (Figure 2; 21); an outer shaft surrounding the drive shaft (Figure 2; 30); a distal end tube attached to a side surface of a distal end portion of the outer shaft, such that a distal end portion of the distal end tube extends to a distal side from a distal end of the cutter (Figure 2; 34) and through which a guide wire can pass (Figure 2; 35), a cutter attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft and by which the object is cut (Figure 3; 40), and a medical device control device (Figure 1; 90) including: a motor configured to rotate the drive shaft (Figure 1; 91); one or more rollers configured to move the drive shaft along a rotation axis of the drive shaft and change an orientation of the drive shaft (Figure 1; 92, may be interpreted as a roller that rotates the drives shaft around a rotation axis, which may be interpreted as moving the shaft along a rotation axis and may also be interpreted as changing an orientation of the drive shaft in rotational space ), and a controller configured to control the one or more rollers to move the drive shaft and/or change the orientation based on the signal output from the one or more first sensors ([¶ 0065], controller may be defined as the switch which actuates the drive unit, which may be turned on or off manually based on sensor readings ), but it does not specifically teach one or more first sensors mounted on a distal end portion of the distal end tube and located on a distal side of the cutter, wherein each of the one or more first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Escudero reference teaches a similar medical device for removing an object in a body cavity (100), comprising: a rotatable shaft (Figure 2A; 114) and a distal end tube attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft (Figure 42; 140) and through which a guide wire can pass (Figure 42; 128); a cutter attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft and by which the object is cut (Figure 2A; 110); and one or more first sensors mounted on a distal end portion of the distal end tube and located on a distal side of the cutter (Figure 41B; 144), wherein each of the first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue ([¶ 0308], transducer 144 may be an electrode for sensing the impedance of contacted tissue, therein detecting contact ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end tube of the Tada reference include the one or more first sensors mounted on the distal end tube and located on a distal side of the cutter, wherein each of the one or more first sensors is configured to detect contact with the object or a biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the first sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue as in the Escudero reference to allow the device to indicate the progression of debulking or proximity of the cutter to a vessel wall or other objects or biological tissue (Escudero; [¶ 0308]). Concerning claim 21, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 1, wherein the Tada reference further teaches the distal tube extending alongside the cutter from a proximal side of the cutter to the distal side of the cutter (Figure 2; 34). Concerning claim 22, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 1, wherein the Tada reference further teaches the guide wire passing through the distal end portion of the distal end tube (Figure 8; 35), which the one or more first sensors would be mounted as modified by the Escudero reference . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim s 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Spangler et al. (US 2020/039763, hereinafter Spangler) . Concerning claim 5, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach a second sensor disposed inside the distal end tube and configured to detect contact with the guide wire and output a signal indicating whether the second sensor is contacting the guide wire. However, the Spangler reference teaches a medical device for removing an object in the body (400), therein being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada and Escudero combination, wherein the Spangler reference teaches a rotatable drive shaft (Figure 6; 304), a cutter (Figure 6; 306) attached to a distal end of the drive shaft by which the object is cut; and a guide wire (Figure 6; 404), wherein the reference further teaches a guidewire detection assembly (Figure 6; 406) and a guidewire presence detector (Figure 6; 412), wherein the guidewire presence detector may include a light sensor to detect relative light levels and thus determine whether the guidewire is present ([¶ 0054-0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end tube include a second sensor disposed therein to detect contact with the guide wire and output a signal indicating whether the second sensor is contacting the guide wire as in the Spangler reference to allow the medical device to regulate the drive mechanism of the device by way of the motion of the guidewire (Spangler; [¶ 0054-0055]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim s 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Escudero et al. (US 2016/0242808, hereinafter Escudero ‘808) . Concerning claim 6, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 1, but does not teach a third sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object or the biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the fourth sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Escudero ‘808 reference teaches a medical device for removing an object in the body (300), therein being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada and Escudero combination, wherein the Escudero ‘808 reference further teaches a rotatable drive shaft (Figure 5A; 522); a cutter (Figure 3B; 312) and an outer shaft surrounding the drive shaft (Figure 3B; 306) and including a distal end portion that is adjacent to the cutter (Figure 3B; 314), and a sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object and output a signal indicating whether the sensor is contacting the object (Figure 3B; imaging element 311 defines a sensor in the form of an imaging transducer that detects contact through visualization of the object, wherein the output is defined as the image produced ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the medical device of Tada and Escudero combination include a third sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft as in the Escudero ‘808 reference to allow a user to locate and assess the object within a vessel, observe cutting and removal of the object, and assess the vessel after treatment (Escudero ‘808; [¶ 0007]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) and Escudero et al. (US 2016/0242808, hereinafter Escudero ‘808) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Igov (US 2015/0080933) . Concerning claim 7, the combination of the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 6, but does not specifically teach an additional sensor disposed on a proximal side of the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object or the biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the fourth sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Igov reference teaches a intraluminal treatment device including imaging sensors, therein defining it as being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 combination, wherein the Igov reference teaches a distal portion of the device including an imaging sensor, wherein the imaging sensor may further be a sensor array including multiple sensors along the distal portion of the device (Figure 8; 846a-d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end portion of the outer shaft of the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 combination include a sensor array which includes a fourth sensor disposed on a proximal side of the distal end portion of the outer shaft as in the Igov reference to provide different sensors that may have different focal lengths, widths of field of view, sensitivities, or band sensitivities (Igov; [¶ 0184]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim s 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Efremkin (US 2019/0142453) and Higgins (US 2014/0316448) . Concerning claim 12, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical system according to claim 11, but does not specifically teach the controller being configured to control the one or more rollers to change the orientation and then move the drive shaft toward a distal direction upon receipt of the signal indicating that the one or more first sensors are contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Efremkin reference teaches a medical system for removing an object in a body cavity (Figures 1-7A; 10), comprising: a medical device including: a rotatable shaft (Figure 1; 30); a cutter attached to a distal end portion of the drive shaft and by which the object is cut (Figure 1; 20); and one or more first sensors disposed on a distal side of the cutter (Figure 1A; 16); and a medical device control device (Figure 2; 12) including: a motor configured to rotate the drive shaft ([¶ 0040]), wherein the drive shaft may be moved along a rotation axis of the drive shaft in a distal direction and change an orientation of the drive shaft ([¶ 0031]), and a controller configured to move the drive shaft based on the signal output from the one or more first sensors ([¶ 0053]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allow the drive shaft of the Tada and Escudero combination be able to be moved along a rotation axis of the drive shaft in a distal direction and change an orientation of the drive shaft as in the Efremkin reference to facilitate predictable advancement of the cutter to assure controllable entry of the cutter into an object in a body cavity (Efremkin; [¶ 0050]). Although the Efremkin reference does not specifically teach one or more rollers configured to move the drive shaft along a rotation axis of the drive shaft and change an orientation of the drive shaft, the Higgins reference teaches a medical device for treating vessel occlusion, therein being in the same field of endeavor as the Efremkin reference, wherein the Higgins reference teaches that such medical devices may include systems enabling two-way axial translation of a tubular member using motorized rollers (Higgins; [¶ 0009]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the axial translation of the drive shaft of the Tada, Escudero, and Efremkin combination be provided by one or more rollers as in the Higgins reference given the reference teaches that such rollers are known structures for axially translating drive shafts for vascular cutting devices (Higgins; [¶ 0009]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim s 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Spangler et al. (US 2020/039763, hereinafter Spangler) . Concerning claim 17, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 11, but does not specifically teach a second sensor disposed inside the distal end tube and configured to detect contact with the guide wire and output a signal indicating whether the second sensor is contacting the guide wire. However, the Spangler reference teaches a medical device for removing an object in the body (400), therein being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada and Escudero combination, wherein the Spangler reference teaches a rotatable drive shaft (Figure 6; 304), a cutter (Figure 6; 306) attached to a distal end of the drive shaft by which the object is cut; and a guide wire (Figure 6; 404), wherein the reference further teaches a guidewire detection assembly (Figure 6; 406) and a guidewire presence detector (Figure 6; 412), wherein the guidewire presence detector may include a light sensor to detect relative light levels and thus determine whether the guidewire is present ([¶ 0054-0055]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end tube include a second sensor disposed therein to detect contact with the guide wire and output a signal indicating whether the second sensor is contacting the guide wire as in the Spangler reference to allow the medical device to regulate the drive mechanism of the device by way of the motion of the guidewire (Spangler; [¶ 0054-0055]), wherein the controller may be configured to control the rollers to change the orientation upon receipt of the signal indicating that the second sensor is contacting the guidewire given the controller may be manually operated in response to sensor data . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim s 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 20 above, and further in view of Escudero et al. (US 2016/0242808, hereinafter Escudero ‘808) . Concerning claim 18, the combination of the Tada and Escudero references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 11, but does not teach a third sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object or the biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the fourth sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Escudero ‘808 reference teaches a medical device for removing an object in the body (300), therein being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada and Escudero combination, wherein the Escudero ‘808 reference further teaches a rotatable drive shaft (Figure 5A; 522); a cutter (Figure 3B; 312) and an outer shaft surrounding the drive shaft (Figure 3B; 306) and including a distal end portion that is adjacent to the cutter (Figure 3B; 314), and a sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object and output a signal indicating whether the sensor is contacting the object (Figure 3B; imaging element 311 defines a sensor in the form of an imaging transducer that detects contact through visualization of the object, wherein the output is defined as the image produced ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the medical device of the Tada and Escudero combination include a third sensor attached to the distal end portion of the outer shaft as in the Escudero ‘808 reference to allow a user to locate and assess the object within a vessel, observe cutting and removal of the object, and assess the vessel after treatment (Escudero ‘808; [¶ 0007]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (US 2019/0262033, hereinafter Tada) in view of Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) and Escudero et al. (US 2009/0018566, Escudero) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Igov (US 2015/0080933) . Concerning claim 19, the combination of the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 references as discussed above teaches the medical device according to claim 18, but does not specifically teach an additional sensor disposed on a proximal side of the distal end portion of the outer shaft and configured to detect contact with the object or the biological tissue and output a signal indicating whether the fourth sensor is contacting the object or the biological tissue. However, the Igov reference teaches an intraluminal treatment device including imaging sensors, therein defining it as being in the same field of endeavor as the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 combination, wherein the Igov reference teaches a distal portion of the device including an imaging sensor, wherein the imaging sensor may further be a sensor array including multiple sensors along the distal portion of the device (Figure 8; 846a-d). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the distal end portion of the outer shaft of the Tada, Escudero, and Escudero ‘808 combination include a sensor array which includes a fourth sensor disposed on a proximal side of the distal end portion of the outer shaft as in the Igov reference to provide different sensors that may have different focal lengths, widths of field of view, sensitivities, or band sensitivities (Igov; [¶ 0184]), wherein the controller given configured to control the rollers to change the orientation upon receipt of the signal indicating that the fourth sensor is contacting the guidewire given the controller may be manually operated in response to sensor data . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 4 and 15-16 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARTIN TRUYEN TON whose telephone number is (571)270-5122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; EST 10:00 AM - 6:30 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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 571-272-4695. 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. /MARTIN T TON/Examiner, Art Unit 3771 5/27/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 2 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 3 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 4 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 5 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 6 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 7 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 8 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 9 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 10 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 11 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 12 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 13 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 14 Art Unit: 3771 Application/Control Number: 18/161,829 Page 15 Art Unit: 3771
Prosecution Insights