CTFR 18/371,461 CTFR 96430 DETAILED ACTION 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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/17/2026 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Status of the claims The amendment received on May 11, 2026 has been acknowledged and entered. Claims 1 and 11 are amended. Claims 3, 4, ,13, and 14 are canceled. Thus, claims 1-2, 5-12, and 15-20 are currently pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed May 11, 2026 with respect to claims 1-2, 5-12, and 15-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by the amendment. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites: A battery diagnosis apparatus comprising: a plurality of batteries: sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries; and a processor configured to: determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries, obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation, set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation, and diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value , wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit identification numbers to the sensing units, receive the identification numbers from the sensing units, determine unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as replaced batteries, select the first battery among the replaced batteries, and select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries . The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.” Step 1: under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Machine). Step 2A, Prong One: under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation that falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations and mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion. For example, the limitations of “determining, by a processor set, different baseline vibration patterns of a bridge for different vehicle categories (para. [0082]: step 710 of instant application),” “classifying, by the processor set, the vehicle into a respective one of the vehicle categories (para. [0084]: step 730 of instant application),” and “selecting, by the processor set, a respective one of the baseline vibration patterns based on the respective one of the vehicle categories (para. [0085]: step 740 of instant application)” are mental processes (i.e., evaluation or judgement). Further, the limitation of “determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries (para. [0064] of instant application),” “obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation (para. [0065] of instant application),” “set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation (para. [0065] of instant application),” and “diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value, wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit identification numbers to the sensing units, receive the identification numbers from the sensing units, determine unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as replaced batteries, select the first battery among the replaced batteries, and select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries (paras. [0072], [0088], [00241]) of instant application)” are mathematical calculations (i.e., compare) or mental processes (evaluation/Judgement). The limitation of “transmitting no identification number among the sensing units, as replaced batteries, selecting the first battery among the replaced batteries, and selecting the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries” merely describes or defines the first battery and second battery to perform diagnosing step which is abstract idea through collecting information (i.e., transmitting or receiving corresponding to insignificant solution activity) and making decision (i.e., determining or selecting corresponding to mental processes). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mathematical calculations, then it falls within the and/or “Mathematical Concepts” and/or “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea . Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 11. Step 2A, Prong Two: under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B. Step 2B: The above claims comprise the following additional elements: In Claim 1: a battery diagnosis apparatus (preamble); processor; a plurality of batteries; sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries; In Claim 11: a battery diagnosis (preamble); processor. The additional elements such as a battery diagnosis apparatus, a plurality of batteries, and a processor are recited at a high-level of generality without descriptions of its specific structure/features to perform the claimed features for producing the mathematical process or mental processes addressed above (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Therefore, none of the additional elements indicate a practical application . Further, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these additional elements/steps are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the relevant based on the prior art of record (Lee, Lee`371). For example, Lee and Lee`371 teach sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries (page 5, lines 26-28 of Lee; para. [0050] of Lee`371). Claim 1 does not present tangible or physical elements/components and/or integration of improvements to be indicative of specific f eatures/structure/acts, for example, how and or with what to diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value. Therefore, the claims have no significance more beyond the abstract idea. Further, an abstract idea itself is just that, abstract, and whether such feature is or is not significant does not preclude it from being considered abstract. An abstract idea by itself, whether it or not it has a benefit, does not reasonably overcome a 101 rejection because it is still an abstract idea. Therefore, the above advantages relate to abstract idea limitations which are not considered. The Improvements in the abstract idea are not qualified as improvements indicating a practical application. The pending claims are not patent eligible since a claim for a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(a).I) and an improvement in the abstract idea itself is not an improvement in technology (see MPEP 2106.05(a).II and MPEP 2106.05(a).II: Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to technology include: iii. Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48)). Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 11. Therefore, the independent claims 1 and 11 are ineligible. Regarding claims 2-10 and 12-20, All features recited in these claims are abstract ideas, as all features found in these claims are directed towards mathematical calculation/mental process steps or insignificant extra solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(d)) . The explanation for the rejection of Claims 2-10 and 12-20 therefore are incorporated herein and applied to Claims 1 and 11. These claims therefore stand rejected for similar reasons as explained in above Claims 1 and 11. 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 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. Claims 1-2, 5-12, and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 20220060931 A, hereinafter referred to as “Lee”) in view of Chang et al. (US 2019/0393560 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Chang”). Regarding claim 1, Lee in view of Chang teaches a battery diagnosis apparatus ( page 3, lines 20: the diagnosis unit 120 ) comprising: a plurality of batteries ( page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging ): sensing units matched with the batteries on a one-to-one basis to detect a voltage or an State of charge (SOC) value of each of the batteries ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells , and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum ); and a processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) configured to: determine a largest SOC deviation between a first battery and a second battery selected among the batteries ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells , and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum ), obtain a largest voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery based on the largest SOC deviation ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell reads on “largest voltage deviation”), set a first threshold value proportional to the largest voltage deviation ( page 5, lines 26-28: maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells ), and diagnose whether a voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the first battery and the second battery with the first threshold value ( page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold , the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged ); and wherein the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to: select the first battery among the replaced batteries, and select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries ( page 9, lines 13-17: the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell having the maximum SOC and the minimum SOC among the plurality of battery cells to diagnose the abnormality of the battery cell . can Through this, misdiagnosis can be reduced by using corrected values rather than using only predicted or estimated values such as SOC or SOH of the battery cell, and even if the battery module is replaced, the influence of the replaced module or the existing module can be reduced, note that “compares the calculated final threshold value with the SOC deviation between the battery cell” and “even if the battery module is replaced, the influence of the replaced module or the existing module can be reduced” reads on “select the first battery among the replaced batteries, and select the second battery among non-replaced batteries of the plurality of batteries ” because selecting the replace batteries or non-replace batteries of the plurality of batteries are inherent or obvious variation of such method). Lee does not specifically teach that transmit identification numbers to the sensing units, receive the identification numbers from the sensing units, determine unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as replaced batteries. However, Chang teaches transmitting identification numbers to the sensing units ( Fig. 4, S42, para. [0075]: he controller 100 may output the first signal via the first communication lines 301 to 305 (S42). ), receive the identification numbers from the sensing units ( Fig. 4, S43; para. [0076]: the second battery pack 201 may determine its identification number based on the first signal (S43) ) and determining unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units, which transmits no identification number among the sensing units, as replaced batteries ( para. [0015]: the initializing of the at least one battery pack may include deleting an identification number of the at least one battery pack ; Fig. 4 and paras. [0075], [0076]: see above, note that the above feature of “initialization” on para. [0015] and paras. [0075] and [0076] reads on “replaced batteries” because replaced batteries (i.e., initialized batteries) cannot have identification number based on procedure in S42 and S43 in Fig. 4). Lee and Chang are both considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the similar filed of managing battery pack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the determining unidentified batteries matched with unidentified sensing units such as is described in Chang into Lee, in order to provide a battery pack management method for a battery management system including at least one battery pack and a controller that are sequentially connected to each other along a first communication line, the battery pack management method including: initializing the at least one battery pack to bring the at least one battery pack into a first state in which an identification number is settable, the initializing of the at least one battery pack being performed by the controller (Chang, para. [0006]), Regarding claim 2, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to select a pair of batteries including a largest measured voltage deviation among the batteries as the first battery and the second battery ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell reads on “largest voltage deviation”). Regarding claim 5, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to determine the largest SOC deviation ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum ) in proportion to a state of health (SOH) deviation between the first battery and the second battery ( page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 7, lines 32-33: the SOH calculator 110 may calculate the SOH based on the state of charge (SOC) of each of the plurality of battery cells, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and “the SOH calculator 110 may calculate the SOH based on the state of charge (SOC) of each of the plurality of battery cells” in page 7, lines 32-33 reads on “to determine the largest SOC deviation in proportion to a state of health (SOH) deviation between the first battery and the second battery”). Regarding claim 6, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 5, in addition, Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor) is further configured to determine the largest SOC deviation to be proportional to a maximum available SOC range ( page 5, lines 26-28:The first battery cell of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is a battery cell having a maximum state of charge (SOC) among the plurality of battery cells, and the second battery cell is an SOC among the plurality of battery cells may be a battery cell with a minimum, note that above feature of “maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell” in page 5, lines 26-28 reads on “determine the largest SOC deviation to be proportional to a maximum available SOC range”). Regarding claim 7, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to obtain the largest voltage deviation using a table in which battery voltage values are matched according to SOC values of the plurality of batteries ( page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 6 above; page 8, line 19: The storage unit 140 may store SOC and SOH data and threshold values of each of the plurality of battery cells, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and “the storage unit 140 storing SOC and SOH data and threshold values of each of the plurality of battery cells” in page 8, line 19 reads on “largest voltage deviation using a table (or table in memory)”). Regarding claim 8, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to set the first threshold value by adding a preset fixed value and the largest voltage deviation ( page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 6 above; page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold, the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells , note that the above feature of “maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell” in page 5, lines 26-28 and “thresholds” in page 5, lines 26-28 and page 5, line 30 reads on “set the first threshold value by adding a preset fixed value and the largest voltage deviation”). Regarding claim 9, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee teaches that the processor ( page 10, line 6: a processor ) is further configured to: select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries ( page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method), and determine whether a voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery is abnormal by comparing a measured voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery with the first threshold value ( page 5, lines 26-28: see above; page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold , the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 7, lines 4-5: see above, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method). Regarding claim 10, Lee in view of Chang teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition Lee teaches that the processor is further configured to: select a third battery and a fourth battery among the plurality of batteries ( page 5, lines 26-28: see claim 9 above; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method), set a second threshold value based on a largest SOC deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery ( page 5, lines 26-28: maximum state of first cell and minimum of second cell; page 5, line 30: use a first threshold to diagnose the plurality of battery cells; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method), and diagnose whether or not a voltage deviation between the third battery and the fourth battery is abnormal based on the second threshold value ( page 5, lines 38-40: When the deviation of the SOC of the first battery cell and the second battery cell is equal to or greater than the threshold , the diagnosis unit of the battery management apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has an abnormality in the battery module including the plurality of battery cells can be judged; page 7, lines 4-5: the battery rack (1) is made of one or more battery cells and a plurality of battery modules 10 capable of charging and discharging, note that the above feature of page 5, lines 26-28 and page 7, lines 4-5 reads on “select a third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries” because selecting third battery and a fourth battery among the batteries is inherent functional property or obvious variation of such method). Regarding claim 11, it is an apparatus type claim having similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Regarding claim 12, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 2 above. Regarding claim 15, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 5 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 5 above. Regarding claim 16, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 6 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 6 above. Regarding claim 17, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 7 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 7 above. Regarding claim 18, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 8 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 8 above. Regarding claim 19, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 9 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 9 above. Regarding claim 20, it is dependent on claim 11 and has similar limitations as of claim 10 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rational as of claim 10 above. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kang (US 2018/0026456 A1) teaches that a battery system includes a plurality of battery modules connected in parallel. Each battery module includes a battery, a first output terminal and a second output terminal, a switch circuit connected between the battery and the first output terminal, and a battery manager to detect a battery voltage of the battery and control the switch circuit. Each battery manager is connected to other battery managers through a communication bus and transmits module information of a corresponding battery module to the other battery managers through the bus. Kang (US 2017/0358936 A1) teaches that a battery system includes battery modules connected in parallel Each battery modules includes a battery, a first and second output terminals, a switch arrangement connected between the battery and the first output terminal, and a battery manager. The battery manager is to detect a current of the battery, determine whether an overcurrent condition exists based on the detected current, and control the switch arrangement. Piao (CN 118671611 A) teaches that the invention claims a device and method for diagnosing battery. The device for diagnosing battery comprises: a plurality of battery modules; a sensing unit which respectively matches with the battery module one by one and detects the voltage of the battery module; a processor configured to detect a replacement module provided as a replacement among the battery modules, and enter a first diagnostic mode based on detecting the replacement module to distinguish a replacement group including the replacement module and a reference group including a battery module other than the replacement module among the battery module. 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 SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm. 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, LEE RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5618. 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. /SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 /LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 2 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 3 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 4 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 5 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 6 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 7 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 8 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 9 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 10 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 11 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 12 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 13 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 14 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 15 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 16 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 17 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 18 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 19 Art Unit: 2858 Application/Control Number: 18/371,461 Page 20 Art Unit: 2858
Prosecution Insights