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 Claims
Claims 2, and 5-7 are canceled.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8-15 are rejected.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 20 “wherein the insulating gasket is in contact with a top surface of the of the base plate” appears to be a typo and should read “wherein the insulating gasket is in contact with a top surface of the base plate”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, and 4-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota et al. (US 7341802 B1, “Ota”) in view of Taniuchi et al. (US 20200203679 A1, “Taniuchi”), Hwang et al. (KR 20160029230 A, “Hwang”), Nakabayashi et al. (US 20100104941 A1, “Nakabayashi”), Park et al. (KR 20190086159 A, “Park”), and Utena et al. (JP 2017182922 A, “Utena”). The machine translations are used herein for citation purposes.
Regarding claim 1, Ota discloses a button-type secondary battery (see P8 col 3 par 4 “button cells”) comprising: an electrode assembly; a can body in which the electrode assembly is accommodated (see FIG. 11 & see P9 col 5 par 1 “electrode assembly housed within case 11”); a base plate configured to cover an opening of an upper end of the can body and bonded to the can body (see FIG. 2 “cover 26”), the base plate having a through-hole therein (see FIG. 5 describes the base plate “26” has a through-hole); an electrode terminal of which at least a portion is disposed into the through-hole to cover the through-hole (see FIG. 10 “102 pin” & see P10 col 8 par 3 “the preferred pin 102 of FIG. 10 has a pinhead that extends above the bottom of the insulator 24, and preferably slightly above the top of the insulator 24, as shown to facilitate connection”); an insulating gasket configured to insulate the electrode terminal from the base plate (see FIG. 4 & FIG. 11 “24 insulator” reads on insulating gasket & “26 cover” reads on base plate), wherein the electrode terminal, the insulating gasket, and the base plate are bonded to each other (see FIG. 3 & FIG. 4 & see P9 col 6 par 2 “pin 22 is mechanically coupled to insulator 24 using braze 23 to bond the underside 31 of pinhead 32 to the top surface 33 of the insulator 24”). Ota discloses wherein the insulating gasket is in contact with a top surface of the base plate and a wall of the through-hole, but the insulating gasket is absent at a lower surface of the base plate (see FIG. 11 “24 insulator” & “26 cover” reads on base plate), and wherein the button-type secondary battery has a diameter greater than a height thereof (see P8 col 3 par 4 “miniature batteries having a diameter greater than the height include coin cells and button cells, so0called due to their shapes”).
Regarding the limitation bonded to each other through thermal fusion, Ota does not explicitly disclose.
Taniuchi teaches bonding with thermal fusion (see [0052] “in the terminal fastening process, welding may be performed to a bonding portion between the positive electrode terminal engaging member and the positive electrode terminal and/or a bonding portion between the negative electrode terminal engaging member and the negative electrode terminal. By performing welding to the interface, the terminals can be reliably fixed, and the airtightness can be further improved”).
Ota and Taniuchi are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely cell structure with a can (see Taniuchi abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate thermal fusion as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0052] “welding”) into the battery of Ota because doing so improves the airtightness of the terminals as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0052]).
Regarding the limitation wherein at least one of the electrode terminal or the base plate is chromate surface-treated on a surface that is in contact with the insulating gasket, Ota does not explicitly disclose.
Hwang teaches chromate treatment (see [0027] “the surface of the cap-down portion or the tin safety band that comes into contact with the adhesive insulating member may be processed by etching, plasma treatment, or chromate treatment; see [0050] “improving the adhesive/adhesive force, or electrolytic resistance may be secured in addition to the adhesive force through chromate treatment”).
Ota and Hwang are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely batteries (see Hwang abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate treatment, as suggested by Hwang (see [0027]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because doing so results in “improving the adhesive/adhesive force, or electrolytic resistance may be secured in addition to the adhesive force through chromate treatment” as suggested by Hwang (see [0050]).
Regarding the limitation wherein a PP-MAH (polypropylene modified with maleic anhydride) layer is on a surface of the insulating gasket, Ota does not explicitly disclose.
Nakabayashi teaches polypropylene modified with maleic anhydride layer on a surface of a gasket (see [0187] “button type enclosed secondary battery”; see [0053] “gasket of the present invention contains a cross-linked ionomer”; see [0064] “polyolefin ionomer” & “maleic acid may be an anhydride”; see [0097] “examples of the polyolefin include”, “polypropylene”; see abstract “gasket that can exhibit good heat resistance (in particular, instantaneous heat resistance), good electrolyte resistance and insulating property, and good sealing property which achieving size and thickness reduction”; see [0221] “maleic anhydride-modified PP”).
Ota and Nakabayashi are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely “button type enclosed secondary battery” (see [0187]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate polypropylene modified with maleic anhydride as suggested by Nakabayashi (see [0221], [0053], [0064], [0097]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because doing so improves the sealing property and thickness reduction as suggested by Nakabayashi (see abstract).
Ota discloses in P10 col 8 par 6 “space between them may be filled with an insulative epoxy, polymer, or a ridge formed on insulator 24”. Regarding the limitation wherein the insulating gasket has a three-layered structure of a PP-MAH layer, a polypropylene (PP) layer, and a PP-MAH layer, Ota does not explicitly disclose.
Nakabayashi teaches layered gasket (see [0217] “thin-layered gasket” & “good sealing property (sealability)” & see [0221] “maleic anhydride-modified PP”).
Park teaches layered film (see abstract “polypropylene-based hot melt film comprising an outer layer, a middle layer and an inner layer” & “random polypropylene maleic anhydride” & “random polypropylene resin” & “polypropylene maleic anhydride” & “excellent thermal adhesive strength”).
Ota and Park are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely adhesive materials (see Park abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate layered gasket as suggested by Nakabayashi (see [0217] & [0221]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Nakabayashi teaches doing so improves the sealing property of the gasket (see [0217]). It would have been obvious to incorporate the layered film as suggested by Park (see abstract) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Park teaches doing so has excellent thermal adhesive strength (see abstract).
Ota discloses brazing (see abstract) & “bottom surface of a feedthrough pinhead” (see abstract), but regarding the limitation wherein the chromate surface-treated portion of at least one of the electrode terminal or the base plate and the PP-MAH layer of the insulating gasket comprise portions that are hydrogen-bonded with each other, Ota does not explicitly disclose.
Utena teaches hydrolysis and maleic anhydride graft-modified polypropylene (see [0036] “the adhesive component forming the adhesive layer 5 in the thermal laminate structure is preferably an acid-modified polyolefin resin obtained by graft-modifying a polyolefin resin with an acid such as maleic anhydride. Since the acid-modified polyolefin resin has polar groups introduced into a portion of the non-polar polyolefin resin, it can firmly adhere to both the non-polar sealant layer 7 formed from a polyolefin resin film or the like and the polar chromate treatment layer 3a”; & polar groups describes hydrogen bonding; see [0037] “adhesive component forming the adhesive layer 5 in the thermal laminate structure is preferably an acid-modified polyolefin resin obtained by graft-modifying a polyolefin resin with an acid such as maleic anhydride”; & see [0039] “the adhesive layer 5 in the dry laminate configuration has a bonding portion with high hydrolysis such as an ester group or a urethane group, so that the adhesive layer 5 in the thermal laminate configuration is preferable for applications requiring higher reliability”; & see [0038] “Examples of polyolefin resins used for the acid-modified polyolefin resin include” & “random polypropylenes” & see [0043] “Step IV: A step of laminating a sealant layer 7 onto the chromate-treated layer 3 a formed on the barrier layer 3 via an adhesive layer 5”).
Ota and Utena are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely adhesives (see [0039]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate hydrolysis from the adhesive layer bonding portion as suggested by Utena (see [0039]) & “polar groups introduced into a portion of the non-polar polyolefin resin” as suggested by Utena (see [0036]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Utena teaches doing so allows for the acid-modified polyolefin resin to firmly adhere to both layers as suggested by Utena (see [0036]).
Regarding claim 4, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1, and further discloses wherein each of the electrode terminal and the base plate includes a metal material (see FIG. 10 “102 pin” & see P10 col 8 par 3 “the preferred pin 102 of FIG. 10 has a pinhead that extends above the bottom of insulator 24, and preferably slightly above the top of insulator 24, as shown, to facilitate connection”; see FIG. 2 “cover 26”; see P7 col 1 par 5 “metal header and the metal pin”), wherein the metal material includes Al & SUS (see P7 col 2 par 2 “aluminum” which reads on Al, & “stainless steel” reads on SUS).
Regarding claim 8, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the electrode terminal comprises an insertion part in the through-hole and a terminal plate part extending outward from an upper end of the insertion part and extending to have a plate shape (see FIG. 8 “pinhead 72” & see P10 col 7 par 4 “pin 62 extends through the insulator 64”) and further discloses in FIG. 4 “24 insulator” which reads on insulating gasket & “26 cover” reads on base plate. Ota does not explicitly disclose and wherein a bottom surface of the terminal plate part, which is in contact with the insulating gasket, is chromate surface-treated.
Taniuchi teaches chromate surface treatment (see [0094] “surface treatment is performed to a bonding surface of the pos. electrode terminal engaging member lower end part with respect to the pos. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part”; see [0095] “surface treatment” & “chromate treatment”; see [0096] “pos. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part” “is sealed by a gasket”; see abstract “airtightness is improved”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate surface treatment as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0094], [0095], [0096]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Taniuchi teaches doing so improves airtightness (see Abstract, [0096]).
Regarding claim 9, Ota disclose the button-type secondary battery of claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the top surface of the base plate facing the insulating gasket is the chromate surface-treated portion.
Taniuchi teaches chromate surface treatment (see [0094] “surface treatment is performed to a bonding surface of”, “and a bonding surface of the negative electrode terminal engaging member upper end part with respect to the negative electrode terminal engaging member lower end part”; see [0095] “surface treatment is” & “chromate treatment”; see [0096] “neg. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part is sealed by a gasket”; see abstract “airtightness is improved”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate surface treatment as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0094], [0095], [0096]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Taniuchi teaches doing so improves airtightness (see Abstract, [0096]).
Regarding claim 10, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 9 and further discloses wherein an outer circumferential surface of the insertion part (see FIG. 8 & FIG. 9 describes “72” describes the insertion part & “64” which reads on outer circumferential surface of the insertion part; see FIG. 12 describes “24 insulator” reads on insulating gasket & “122 pin”). Ota does not explicitly disclose which is in contact with the insulating gasket, is chromate surface treated.
Taniuchi teaches chromate surface treatment (see [0094] “surface treatment is performed to a bonding surface of the pos. electrode terminal engaging member lower end part with respect to the pos. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part”; see FIG. 1(c) & (d) describes “positive electrode terminal engaging member upper end part 12a”; see [0095] “surface treatment is” & “chromate treatment”; see [0096] “pos. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part”, “is sealed by a gasket”; see abstract “airtightness is improved”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate surface treatment as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0094], [0095], [0096]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Taniuchi teaches doing so improves airtightness (see Abstract, [0096]).
Regarding claim 11, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 10. Ota does not explicitly disclose wherein an inner surface of the base plate having a through-hole, which is in contact with the insulating gasket, is chromate surface-treated.
Taniuchi teaches chromate surface treatment (see [0094] “surface treatment is performed to a bonding surface of”, “and a bonding surface of the neg. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part with respect to the neg. electrode terminal engaging member lower end part”; see [0095] “surface treatment” & “chromate treatment”; see FIG. 2 “neg. electrode power collecting member 6b”; see [0096] “neg. electrode terminal engaging member upper end part is sealed by a gasket”; see abstract “airtightness is improved”).
Hwang teaches chromate treatment (see [0027] “the surface of the cap-down portion or the thin safety band that comes into contact with the adhesive insulating member may be processed by” & “chromate treatment”; see [0050] “improving the adhesive/adhesive force, or electrolytic resistance may be secured in addition to the adhesive force through chromate treatment”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate surface treatment as suggested by Taniuchi (see [0094], [0095], FIG. 2) and by Hwang (see [0027] & [0050]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because doing so improves the airtightness as suggested by Taniuchi (see abstract) and doing so improves the adhesive force as suggested by Hwang (see [0050]).
Regarding claim 12, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1 and further discloses wherein a top plate assembly, in which the electrode terminal, the insulating gasket, and the base plate are bonded to each other, has a thickness of 0.4 mm (see P10 col 8 par 1 “overall thickness is only about 0.4 mm thick”).
Ota discloses a range of 0.4 mm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.4 mm to 0.8 mm. MPEP 2144.05 I states that 'In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)'.
Regarding claim 13, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1 and further discloses wherein an edge of the base plate and the opening of the can body are bonded to each other by laser welding (see P9 col 5 par 1 “the connection of electrode 18 to the current collector, or tab, or to pin 22 may be made by any means known in the art and may comprise” & “laser welding”; see P10 col 7 par 3 describes welding of the feedthrough pin & see FIG. 6 describes the base plate; see P10 col 7 par 5 “cover weld” & describes “both the pin (102, 112, or 122) and the cover 26 are brazed to the underside of the insulator 24. Although the cover can be welded to the case from the side, top-down welding of a cover to case 11 is preferred for ease of manufacturing; it also protects the feedthrough and electrode assembly from overheating during the welding process” which describes the base plate is welded).
Regarding claim 14, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1 and further discloses an insulator (see FIG. 4 & P9 col 6 par 2 “insulator 24” & “braze 25 to bond the bottom surface 34 of insulator 24 to the top surface 35 of cover 26”; see P9 col 5 par 1 “electrode assembly housed within case 11”). Ota does not explicitly disclose an insulating tape.
Hwang teaches chromate treatment & adhesive insulating member which reads on insulating tape (see [0027] “the surface of the cap-down portion or the thin safety band that comes into contact with the adhesive insulating member may be processed” & “chromate treatment”; see [0050] “improving the adhesive/adhesive force, or electrolytic resistance may be secured in addition to the adhesive force through chromate treatment).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate adhesive insulating member as suggested by Hwang (see [0027]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Hwang teaches doing so improves the adhesive force (see [0050]), reduces thickness (see [0001]) and secures structural stability (see [0001]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota et al. (US 7341802 B1, “Ota”) in view of Taniuchi et al. (US 20200203679 A1, “Taniuchi”), Hwang et al. (KR 20160029230 A, “Hwang”), Nakabayashi et al. (US 20100104941 A1, “Nakabayashi”), Park et al. (KR 20190086159 A, “Park”), and Utena et al. (JP 2017182922 A, “Utena”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (US 20100248014 A1, “Huang”). The machine translations are used herein for citation purposes.
Regarding claim 3, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the electrode terminal and the base plate is chromate surface-treated on a surface that is in contact with the insulating gasket.
Hwang teaches chromate treatment (see [0027] “surface of the cap-down portion or the thin safety band” & “chromate treatment”; see [0050] “improving electrolytic resistance may be secured”).
Huang teaches chromate treatment on cap & seal coating 34 (see [0020] “chromate, formed on the surface”; see [0050] “seal coating 34 covers a portion of the seal body 32 exposed to the interior of the cell between the container 12 and internal seal plate 26, thereby reducing vapor transmission through seal member 30”; see [0057] “seal coating 34”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate chromate treatment on the surface of the cap-down portion as suggested by Hwang (see [0027]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Hwang teaches doing so allows for “electrolytic resistance may be secured” as suggested by Hwang (see [0050]). It would have been obvious to incorporate “seal coating 34” (see [0057]) and “chromate, formed on the surface” (see [0020]) as suggested by Huang (see [0057]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because doing so reduces “vapor transmission through seal member” as suggested by Huang (see [0057]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota et al. (US 7341802 B1, “Ota”) in view of Taniuchi et al. (US 20200203679 A1, “Taniuchi”), Hwang et al. (KR 20160029230 A, “Hwang”), Nakabayashi et al. (US 20100104941 A1, “Nakabayashi”), Park et al. (KR 20190086159 A, “Park”), and Utena et al. (JP 2017182922 A, “Utena”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (CN 111613739 A, “Peng”). The machine translations are used herein for citation purposes.
Regarding claim 15, Ota discloses the button-type secondary battery of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the electrode terminal has a positive pole (see P10 col 6 par 4 “positive polarity feedthrough”). Ota does not explicitly disclose and wherein each of the can body and the base plate has a negative pole.
Peng teaches in [0090] “bottom shell 101 forms the negative electrode of the button cell” & “thereby enabling the cell 20 to supply power to the electronic device” & see FIG. 2.
Ota and Peng are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely button cells (see [0090]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the bottom shell has the negative pole, as suggested by Peng (see [0090]) into the button-type secondary battery of Ota because Peng teaches doing so provides power to the electronic device (see [0090]) and a skilled artisan would recognize doing so forms the button cell.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments on P8 “the applied art consequently further dose not disclose or render obvious an arrangement wherein the insulating gasket is in contact with a top surface of the base plate and a wall of the through-hole, but the insulating gasket is absent at a lower surface of the base plate, as claimed” & “the gaskets of the applied art do not have a structure of an insulating gasket in contact with a top surface of the of a base plate and a wall of the through-hole, but the insulating gasket is absent at a lower surface of the base plate, as claimed” are unpersuasive because Ota discloses wherein the insulating gasket is in contact with a top surface of the base plate and a wall of the through-hole, but the insulating gasket is absent at a lower surface of the base plate (see FIG. 11 “24 insulator” & “26 cover” reads on base plate).
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 SARAH APPLEGATE whose telephone number is (571)270-0370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/S.A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JAMES M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 08/06/2026
Prosecution Insights