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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The drawing objections are withdrawn in part as applicant has not addressed the issues with elements 200 and 100 of Figs. [1A, 1B]. Claim objections are withdrawn in light of the amendments. Specification objections are withdrawn due to the amendments.
Applicant has argued that their disclosed converter inside the battery is distinct from the converter of Stoltz (hereinafter Stolt). Applicant has further argued that industrial battery packs have a certain voltage range inherently (noted that applicant has not defined this range clearly, but has used an exemplary amount). Applicant has further argued that Hinterberger (hereinafter Hinte) fails to have the same scope as the present application. Therefore, Hinte has been replaced with a different reference.
As demonstrated by applicant’s Fig. 2, while the converter 202 may be inside the battery system, it is not inside any battery pack 201. Similar for Stolt in Fig. 43, battery housing (highlighted/marked below) includes converter 4306. Thus, in light of applicant’s disclosure/figure, Stolt anticipates the claimed feature argued by applicant.
PNG
media_image1.png
567
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
652
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because 200 and 100 of Figs. [1A, 1B] are not provided with clear symbols/legend/text to easily understand what they refer to with only the figure. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claims 11-21, 23-25, and 43-46
11, 12, 15-18, 25, and 43, 45-48 [102] Stoltz+24[103]
Claim Objections
Claims 11-15, 17-26, 43, 45-48 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant alternates between “lower, standard battery voltage” and “the standard battery voltage”. Emend to stay consistent.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-15, 17, 18, 25, 43, and 45-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stoltz (USPGPN 20200247239; hereinafter Stolt).
Independent Claim 11, Stolt discloses a battery (116) for use within an electric vehicle (4202, see esp. Figs. [42, 45]), (battery assembly of Figs. [1, 2, 4, 21A-23, 40, 42-73, esp. 43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70]) comprising:
a battery pack (4310, 4308);
a battery management system (118 in Figs. [1, 23], 4414/4410/4412 in Fig. 40, would correspond to the structure of Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70]);
a connection for connecting the battery to a power source (busbar 4304 to converter 4306, seen best by comparing Figs. [1, 4] with Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], where 4306 [of e.g. at least Fig. 43] corresponds to 114 of Figs. [1, 4], ¶’s [154, 192-195]);
a converter disposed inside the battery (comparing applicant’s Fig. 2 with Fig. 43, it is equivalent to the scope disclosed by applicant as it is within the housing) for converting a voltage received from the power source to a lower-standard battery voltage (¶’s [142-145, esp. 142: “In embodiments, the motor drive converter (MDC) 114 may be a combined motor drive and DC-DC converter intended to support electrification of vehicles, such as using a multi-rail 48 V/12 V architecture. The motor drive supports starter and generator operation of a motor/generator 112 (e.g., a permanent magnet synchronous motor, wire-wound synchronous motor, induction motor, and the like) and the DC-DC converter bridges system voltages (e.g., a 48V system and a 12V system with bidirectional power flow)”] where bridging two voltages levels bidirectionally means bucking, esp. as ¶’s [143-145] describes the battery as 12V and at least ¶’s [107, 200-202, 245] describes 240/112/106 as 48V up to 96V;
where 114 in Figs. [1, 4] corresponds to 4306 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43 as one of ordinary skill in the art would understands;
24V and 48V battery further described as alternative to 12V in ¶[91], which means 96V stepped down to 12-48V would involve bucking);
wherein the standard battery voltage is a standard battery voltage for automated guided vehicles (AGVs), ground support equipment (GSE), or industrial electric vehicles (¶’s [89, 114, 119, 143, 218] and Figs. [42, 45] show the vehicle as a truck [esp. a pickup truck, or truck with trailer], which is known to be a vehicle used for industrial use [i.e. carrying heavy loads for industry], where ¶[207] describes the battery as 48V); and
at least one busbar connecting the converter to the battery pack (4304 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43, see ¶’s [202, 205, 207, 211, esp. ¶[205]); and
wherein the lower, standard battery voltage is received by the battery pack through the at least one busbar to rapidly charge the battery pack (intended use limitation, [In response to applicant's argument that “to rapidly charge the battery pack”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.];
applicant has not claimed a degree to compare rapidly charging vs non-rapidly charging, so as long as charging occurs, it meets the claim limitations;
it is noted that the applicant has omitted the difference between high current and low current, thus charging a battery with current is going to be larger than another current [e.g. 10mA is going to be less than 500mA, 1mA is less than 500mA, etc.], thus as the charging current would be higher than a smaller current, Stolt discloses the limitation implicitly;
furthermore, it is understood that when a converter decreases the voltage the current would be increased inversely, and vice versa due to having roughly the same power amount going in as the power amount going out;
¶’s [93, 108, 120-122, 136, 154, 158, 164, 175, 179, 181-183, 185, 188, 193-195, 201, 244-247, 249, 255, esp. 108, 120-122, 136, 179, 201, 244-247, 249, 255], Figs. [36, 38],
where as the MDC 114/4306 is shown to be inside of the housing, the voltage it receives from the outside would be the battery voltage, and the step-down operation causes the received battery voltage to be reduced).
(116) for use within an electric vehicle (4202, see esp. Figs. [42, 45]), (battery assembly of Figs. [1, 2, 4, 21A-23, 40, 42-73, esp. 43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70])
Independent Claim 43, Stolt discloses a battery (116) for use within an electric vehicle (4202, see esp. Figs. [42, 45]), (battery assembly of Figs. [1, 2, 4, 21A-23, 40, 42-73, esp. 43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70]) comprising:
a battery pack (4310, 4308) which receives a battery voltage from a converter (MDC 114/4306) through a busbar (4304 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43, see ¶’s [202, 205, 207, 211, esp. ¶[205]);
wherein the converter is connected to, and receives, a high voltage power from a power source through a cable and steps down the high voltage power to the lower standard battery voltage(¶’s [142-145, esp. 142: “In embodiments, the motor drive converter (MDC) 114 may be a combined motor drive and DC-DC converter intended to support electrification of vehicles, such as using a multi-rail 48 V/12 V architecture. The motor drive supports starter and generator operation of a motor/generator 112 (e.g., a permanent magnet synchronous motor, wire-wound synchronous motor, induction motor, and the like) and the DC-DC converter bridges system voltages (e.g., a 48V system and a 12V system with bidirectional power flow)”] where bridging two voltages levels bidirectionally means bucking, esp. as ¶’s [143-145] describes the battery as 12V and at least ¶’s [107, 200-202, 245] describes 240/112/106 as 48V up to 96V;
where 114 in Figs. [1, 4] corresponds to 4306 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43 as one of ordinary skill in the art would understands;
24V and 48V battery further described as alternative to 12V in ¶[91], which means 96V stepped down to 12-48V would involve bucking)
wherein the converter is disposed inside the battery (comparing applicant’s Fig. 2 with Fig. 43, it is equivalent to the scope disclosed by applicant as it is within the housing), and
wherein the standard battery voltage is a standard battery voltage for automated guided vehicles (AGVs), ground support equipment (GSE), or industrial electric vehicles (¶’s [89, 114, 119, 143, 218] and Figs. [42, 45] show the vehicle as a truck [esp. a pickup truck, or truck with trailer], which is known to be a vehicle used for industrial use [i.e. carrying heavy loads for industry], where ¶[207] describes the battery as 48V) at a high charging current (it is noted that the applicant has omitted the difference between high current and low current, thus charging a battery with current is going to be larger than another current [e.g. 10mA is going to be less than 500mA, 1mA is less than 500mA, etc.], thus as the charging current would be higher than a smaller current, Stolt discloses the limitation implicitly;
furthermore, it is understood that when a converter decreases the voltage the current would be increased inversely, and vice versa due to having roughly the same power amount going in as the power amount going out).
Independent Claim 45, Stolt discloses a method for ultra-fast charging (intended use limitation, [In response to applicant's argument that “to rapidly charge the battery pack”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.];
applicant has not claimed a degree to compare rapidly charging vs non-rapidly charging, so as long as charging occurs, it meets the claim limitations;
it is noted that the applicant has omitted the difference between high current and low current, thus charging a battery with current is going to be larger than another current [e.g. 10mA is going to be less than 500mA, 1mA is less than 500mA, etc.], thus as the charging current would be higher than a smaller current, Stolt discloses the limitation implicitly;
furthermore, it is understood that when a converter decreases the voltage the current would be increased inversely, and vice versa due to having roughly the same power amount going in as the power amount going out;
¶’s [93, 108, 120-122, 136, 154, 158, 164, 175, 179, 181-183, 185, 188, 193-195, 201, 244-247, 249, 255, esp. 108, 120-122, 136, 179, 201, 244-247, 249, 255])
of a battery (116 in battery assembly of Figs. [1, 2, 4, 21A-23, 40, 42-73, esp. 43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70]) for use within an electric vehicle (4202, see esp. Figs. [42, 45]), comprising the steps of (Figs. [36, 38]):
wherein the converter is disposed inside the battery (comparing applicant’s Fig. 2 with Fig. 43, it is equivalent to the scope disclosed by applicant as it is within the housing)
delivering a high voltage from a power source to a converter (114) built into a battery (¶’s [142-145, esp. 142: “In embodiments, the motor drive converter (MDC) 114 may be a combined motor drive and DC-DC converter intended to support electrification of vehicles, such as using a multi-rail 48 V/12 V architecture. The motor drive supports starter and generator operation of a motor/generator 112 (e.g., a permanent magnet synchronous motor, wire-wound synchronous motor, induction motor, and the like) and the DC-DC converter bridges system voltages (e.g., a 48V system and a 12V system with bidirectional power flow)”] where bridging two voltages levels bidirectionally means bucking, esp. as ¶’s [143-145] describes the battery as 12V and at least ¶’s [107, 200-202, 245] describes 240/112/106 as 48V up to 96V;
where 114 in Figs. [1, 4] corresponds to 4306 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43 as one of ordinary skill in the art would understands;
24V and 48V battery further described as alternative to 12V in ¶[91], which means 96V stepped down to 12-48V would involve bucking;
Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43 shows the converter built-into a battery as the converter is on/in the housing of the battery system);
converting the high voltage to a lower battery voltage (¶’s [107, 142-145, esp. 142]);
wherein the standard battery voltage is a standard battery voltage for automated guided vehicles (AGVs), ground support equipment (GSE), or industrial electric vehicles (¶’s [89, 114, 119, 143, 218] and Figs. [42, 45] show the vehicle as a truck [esp. a pickup truck, or truck with trailer], which is known to be a vehicle used for industrial use [i.e. carrying heavy loads for industry], where ¶[207] describes the battery as 48V)
delivering the lower battery voltage to a battery pack through at least one busbar (busbar 4304 to converter 4306, seen best by comparing Figs. [1, 4] with Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], where 4306 [of e.g. at least Fig. 43] corresponds to 114 of Figs. [1, 4], ¶’s [154, 192-195]).
Dependent Claims 47 and 48, Stolt discloses the lower, standard battery voltage is approximately 24V or 48V (¶’s [91, 207])
Dependent Claim 46, Stolt discloses the power source is a single or three phase AC power source (¶’s [143-145, 207, 212, 244-247, esp. 207] describes 3 phase AC power source)
and the step of converting the high voltage to a battery voltage further comprises the step of converting the high voltage from AC to DC (¶’s [118,143,179,202,237,244, esp.118,143,202])
Dependent Claim 12, Stolt discloses the battery pack is a lithium ion battery pack (¶’s [11, 144] describes the battery as possibly lithium-ion).
Dependent Claim 13, Stolt discloses the lithium ion battery pack comprises a plurality of lithium ion batteries connected in parallel (¶[144] describes the battery having a plurality of batteries in parallel, see further ¶’s [193, 197]).
Dependent Claim 14, Stolt discloses the lithium ion battery pack comprises a plurality of lithium ion batteries connected in series (¶[144] describes the battery having a plurality of batteries in series).
Dependent Claim 15, Stolt discloses the power source is a high voltage power source (as the power source is higher than the battery level of 12V, it would be a high voltage power source since applicant did not specify what a low voltage power source is).
Dependent Claim 17, Stolt discloses the converter is a DC-DC converter, which steps down the voltage from the power source to the lower battery source voltage (¶’s [142-145, esp. 142: “In embodiments, the motor drive converter (MDC) 114 may be a combined motor drive and DC-DC converter intended to support electrification of vehicles, such as using a multi-rail 48 V/12 V architecture. The motor drive supports starter and generator operation of a motor/generator 112 (e.g., a permanent magnet synchronous motor, wire-wound synchronous motor, induction motor, and the like) and the DC-DC converter bridges system voltages (e.g., a 48V system and a 12V system with bidirectional power flow)”] where bridging two voltages levels bidirectionally means bucking, esp. as ¶’s [143-145] describes the battery as 12V and at least ¶’s [107, 200-202] describes 240/112/106 as 48V;
where 114 in Figs. [1, 4] corresponds to 4306 in Figs. [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70], e.g. Fig. 43 as one of ordinary skill in the art would understands).
Dependent Claim 18, Stolt discloses the converter is an AC-DC converter which converts AC power received from the power source to DC, and also steps down the voltage from the power source to the lower battery voltage (¶’s [118,143,179,202,237,244, esp.118,143,202]).
Dependent Claim 25, Stolt discloses the at least one busbar comprises a hard wire from the converter's output to the battery pack (as seen in [43, 46, 48-51, 54-58, 70, e.g. Fig. 43], the busbar 4304 is hard/rigid in shape and lacks a plug between it and the battery pack).
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoltz (USPGPN 20200247239; hereinafter Stolt)
Dependent Claim 24, while Stolt may not explicitly teach the at least one busbar comprises a copper plate, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the busbar would have been made of copper [and thus be a copper plate] due to copper having high electrical conductivity characteristics while having reduced costs compared to other high conductive materials like silver/gold/platinum, official notice taken,
where a busbar implies a metal plate).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stolt in view of Voegele (USPGPN 20160121739; hereinafter Voeg)
Dependent Claim 19, Stolt is silent to the power source is a DC charger (¶[202] states that the converter may receive external inputs [other than the battery and motor generator] of a DC or AC, furthermore ¶[89] describes that Stolt’s vehicle may utilize shore power from locations, i.e. receive external power)
Voeg teaches the power source is a DC charger (Figs. [5, 6] describes the power source 12 providing power directly to DC-DC converter 14, where 14 is described to step-down converter power analogous to Stolt and the present application ¶’s [28-35, esp. 32, 33]). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by having a DC power supply, instead of an AC power supply, it can serve to reduce the need for a dedicated AC-DC converter on the vehicle, and so reduce both costs and complexity. Furthermore, by allowing external charging power to provide power over only providing charging power from an on-board engine/regenerative-braking, one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the efficiency can be improved and the emissions can be reduced (i.e. a plug-in hybrid over only an isolated hybrid vehicle {non-plug-in hybrid}).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stolt with Voeg to provide improved simplicity, efficiency & costs, and reduced emissions
Claims 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stolt in view of Marcinkiewicz (USPGPN 20180334046; hereinafter Marci)
Dependent Claims 20 and 23, Stolt is silent to the connection is an AC wall plug to connect to a power grid (with respect to [wrt] Claim 20) and the connection comprises a charging cable and an AC plug (wrt Claim 23) (¶[202] states that the converter may receive external inputs [other than the battery and motor generator] of a DC or AC, furthermore ¶[89] describes that Stolt’s vehicle may utilize shore power from locations, i.e. receive external power).
Marci teaches the connection is an AC wall plug (wall outlet is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to be a AC wall plug connection) to connect to a power grid (¶’s [05, 68, 70-73, 75-77, esp. 68] describes connection to a shore power utility, i.e. power grid) the connection comprises a charging cable and an AC plug (power cord described, ¶[68]). Noted that analogously, a refrigerated truck [i.e. industrial truck] is described in ¶[61], thus Maric is analogous to both Stolt and the present application.
Furthermore, the power battery 120 of Fig. 1 is described to have 12-48V (¶[58]), and the power from the power grid is buck converted for the battery (¶’s [68, 71]). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by allowing for power inputs from a wall outlet/plug to charge your electric vehicle battery, it serves to improve the convenience for users, as wall outlets are much easier to find [e.g. in your own home/business] rather than a dedicated charging station. Furthermore, by allowing external charging power to provide power over only providing charging power from an on-board engine/regenerative-braking, one of ordinary skill in the art understands that the efficiency can be improved and the emissions can be reduced (i.e. a plug-in hybrid over only an isolated hybrid vehicle {non-plug-in hybrid}).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stolt with Marci to provide improved convenience and efficiency, and reduced emissions.
Dependent Claims 21 and 22, the combination of Stolt and Marci teaches the power source is a three-phase power source [wrt claim 21] and the power source is a single phase power source [wrt claim 22]; (Marci ¶[68]).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stolt in view of Horito et al (USPGPN 20160105054)
Dependent Claim 26, Stolt teaches the battery management system is connected to the built-in converter (as described above)
Stolt is silent to the battery management system includes Wi-Fi, Bluetooth Low Energy, Near Field Communication, and/or GPS.
Horito teaches the battery management system includes Wi-Fi, Bluetooth Low Energy, Near Field Communication, and/or GPS (¶’s [118, 128]). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that wireless communication improves the convenience for a user (do not have to physically connect, saving time and effort) and reduces costs/complexity (less cables/wiring), see ¶[118: “transmit to a remote location”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stolt with Horito to provide improved convenience, costs, and simplicity.
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 JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights