CTNF 18/455,733 CTNF 101785 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 10-12, 17, 19-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by LaChapelle et al. (US 20180284245 A1) . Regarding claim 1, LaChapelle teaches A ranging controller configured to be adapted to a movable object and control a ranging device to measure a distance to a reflection point by detecting a reflection light reflected from the reflection point to which a scan light is emitted, the ranging controller comprising: (The lidar system 100 may be referred to as a laser ranging system, a laser radar system, a LIDAR system, a lidar sensor, or a laser detection and ranging (LADAR or ladar) system. (paragraph 0024)) a processor configured to: determine whether an execution condition for executing a calibration of the ranging device is satisfied; (The controller is configured to detect a triggering event for performing calibration, (paragraph 0007)) control the ranging device to execute a calibration mode in a case where the processor determines that the execution condition is satisfied, the calibration mode being lower in a scan speed of the scan light than a normal ranging mode or being higher in a resolution of the distance to the reflection point than the normal ranging mode, the normal ranging mode being executed by the processor in a case where the processor determines that the execution condition is not satisfied; (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) and execute the calibration based on a ranging result of the ranging device in the calibration mode. (The method includes detecting a triggering event for performing calibration of a lidar system, causing the lidar system to not emit light during a calibration period, determining an amount of noise measured by the lidar system during the calibration period, generating a noise level metric based on the amount of noise detected during the calibration period, and adjusting subsequent readings of the lidar system using the noise level metric. (paragraph 0006)) Regarding claim 2, LaChapelle teaches The ranging controller according to Claim 1, wherein the calibration mode is higher in the resolution than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 3, LaChapelle teaches The ranging controller according to Claim 1, wherein the calibration mode is lower in the scan speed than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 8, LaChapelle teaches The ranging controller according to Claim 1, wherein the ranging device is further configured to acquire a distance image having distance information in each pixel by detecting the reflection light through a plurality of light receiving elements included in each pixel, (In an example implementation, the receiver 140 includes one or more avalanche photodiodes (APDs) or one or more single-photon avalanche diodes (SPADs). In another implementation, the receiver 140 includes one or more PN photodiodes (e.g., a photodiode structure formed by a p-type semiconductor and a n-type semiconductor) or one or more PIN photodiodes (e.g., a photodiode structure formed by an undoped intrinsic semiconductor region located between p-type and n-type regions). (paragraph 0059)) and the processor is further configured to execute the calibration mode being smaller in number of the plurality of light receiving elements in each pixel than the normal ranging mode. (The active region 166 may refer to an area over which receiver 164 may receive or detect input light. The active region may have any suitable size or diameter d, such as for example, a diameter of approximately 25 μm, 50 μm, 80 μm, 100 μm, 200 μm, 500 μm, 1 mm, 2 mm, or 5 mm. (paragraph 0078) The prior art refers to an active region meaning there is a portion of the receiver that is not receiving light. Since this can be controlled, they could choose to have an area that is smaller during calibration than normal detection. ) Regarding claim 10, LaChapelle teaches A ranging control method executed by a processor to control a ranging device to measure a distance to a reflection point by detecting a reflection light reflected from the reflection point to which a scan light is emitted, the ranging device configured to be adapted to a movable object, the ranging control method comprising: (One example embodiment of the techniques of this disclosure is a method for calibrating lidar systems operating in vehicles. (paragraph 0006)) a determination process that determines whether an execution condition for executing a calibration of the ranging device is satisfied; (The controller is configured to detect a triggering event for performing calibration, (paragraph 0007)) a mode execution process that controls the ranging device to execute a calibration mode in a case where the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied, the calibration mode being lower in a scan speed of the scan light than a normal ranging mode or being higher in a resolution of the distance to the reflection point than the normal ranging mode, the normal ranging mode being executed by the mode execution process in a case where the determination process determines that the execution condition is not satisfied; (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) and a calibration process that executes the calibration based on a ranging result of the ranging device in the calibration mode. (The method includes detecting a triggering event for performing calibration of a lidar system, causing the lidar system to not emit light during a calibration period, determining an amount of noise measured by the lidar system during the calibration period, generating a noise level metric based on the amount of noise detected during the calibration period, and adjusting subsequent readings of the lidar system using the noise level metric. (paragraph 0006)) Regarding claim 11, LaChapelle teaches The ranging control method according to Claim 10, wherein the calibration mode is higher in the resolution being than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 12, LaChapelle teaches The ranging control method according to Claim 10, wherein the calibration mode further is lower in the scan speed than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 17, LaChapelle teaches The ranging control method according to Claim 10, wherein the ranging device is further configured to acquire a distance image having distance information in each pixel by detecting the reflection light through a plurality of light receiving elements included in each pixel, (In an example implementation, the receiver 140 includes one or more avalanche photodiodes (APDs) or one or more single-photon avalanche diodes (SPADs). In another implementation, the receiver 140 includes one or more PN photodiodes (e.g., a photodiode structure formed by a p-type semiconductor and a n-type semiconductor) or one or more PIN photodiodes (e.g., a photodiode structure formed by an undoped intrinsic semiconductor region located between p-type and n-type regions). (paragraph 0059)) and the mode execution process controls the ranging device to execute the calibration mode being smaller in number of the plurality of light receiving elements in each pixel than the normal ranging mode. (The active region 166 may refer to an area over which receiver 164 may receive or detect input light. The active region may have any suitable size or diameter d, such as for example, a diameter of approximately 25 μm, 50 μm, 80 μm, 100 μm, 200 μm, 500 μm, 1 mm, 2 mm, or 5 mm. (paragraph 0078) The prior art refers to an active region meaning there is a portion of the receiver that is not receiving light. Since this can be controlled, they could choose to have an area that is smaller during calibration than normal detection. ) Regarding claim 19, LaChapelle teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions configured to, when executed by a processor to control a ranging device being adapted to a movable object to measure a distance to a reflection point by detecting a reflection light reflected from the reflection point to which a scan light is emitted, cause the processor to execute: (In particular embodiments, one or more implementations of the subject matter described herein may be implemented as one or more computer programs (e.g., one or more modules of computer-program instructions encoded or stored on a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium). (paragraph 0137)) a determination process that determines whether an execution condition for executing a calibration of the ranging device is satisfied; (The controller is configured to detect a triggering event for performing calibration, (paragraph 0007)) a mode execution process that controls the ranging device to execute a calibration mode in a case where the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied, the calibration mode being lower in a scan speed of the scan light than a normal ranging mode or being higher in a resolution of the distance to the reflection point than the normal ranging mode, the normal ranging mode being executed by the mode execution process in a case where the determination process determines that the execution condition is not satisfied; (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) and a calibration process that executes the calibration based on a ranging result of the ranging device in the calibration mode. (The method includes detecting a triggering event for performing calibration of a lidar system, causing the lidar system to not emit light during a calibration period, determining an amount of noise measured by the lidar system during the calibration period, generating a noise level metric based on the amount of noise detected during the calibration period, and adjusting subsequent readings of the lidar system using the noise level metric. (paragraph 0006)) Regarding claim 20, LaChapelle teaches The non-transitory computer readable medium according to Claim 19, wherein the calibration mode is higher in the resolution than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 21, LaChapelle teaches A ranging device configured to measure a distance to a reflection point by detecting a reflection light reflected from the reflection point to which a scan light is emitted and further configured to be adapted to a movable object, the ranging device comprising: (The lidar system 100 may be referred to as a laser ranging system, a laser radar system, a LIDAR system, a lidar sensor, or a laser detection and ranging (LADAR or ladar) system. (paragraph 0024)) a processor configured to determine whether an execution condition for executing a calibration is satisfied, (The controller is configured to detect a triggering event for performing calibration, (paragraph 0007)) control the ranging device to execute a calibration mode in a case where the processor determines that the execution condition is satisfied, the calibration mode being lower in a scan speed of the scan light than a normal ranging mode or being higher in a resolution of the distance to the reflection point than the normal ranging mode, the normal ranging mode being executed by the processor in a case where the processor determines that the execution condition is not satisfied, (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) and execute the calibration based on a ranging result of the ranging device in the calibration mode. (The method includes detecting a triggering event for performing calibration of a lidar system, causing the lidar system to not emit light during a calibration period, determining an amount of noise measured by the lidar system during the calibration period, generating a noise level metric based on the amount of noise detected during the calibration period, and adjusting subsequent readings of the lidar system using the noise level metric. (paragraph 0006)) Regarding claim 22, LaChapelle teaches The ranging device according to Claim 21, wherein the calibration mode is higher in the resolution than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 23, LaChapelle teaches The non-transitory computer readable medium according to Claim 19, wherein the calibration mode is lower in the scan speed than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) Regarding claim 24, LaChapelle teaches The ranging device according to Claim 21, wherein the calibration mode is lower in the scan speed than the normal ranging mode. (In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds. (paragraph 0064)) 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) 4-7, 9, 13-16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaChapelle et al. (US 20180284245 A1) in view of Kazuki (WO 2020203657) . Regarding claim 4, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 1 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the processor is further configured to determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where the movable object has entered a calibration area in which execution of the calibration mode is permitted. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where the movable object has entered a calibration area in which execution of the calibration mode is permitted. (Subsequently, the information processing apparatus 100 determines whether the target vehicle is present in the region where the calibration can be performed based on the information of the region FV 3 (paragraph 0023)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki allows for confirmation that calibration can be conducted. Regarding claim 5, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 1 as previously stated however LaChapelle further teaches limit a ranging range of the calibration mode to a specified range within the ranging area, and the prescribed calibration target exists in the specified range. (The output beam of light 125 is directed downrange toward a remote target 130 located a distance D from the lidar system 100 and at least partially contained within a field of regard of the system 100. Depending on the scenario and/or the implementation of the lidar system 100, D can be between 1 m and 1 km, for example. (paragraph 0025)) LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the processor is further configured to: determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where a prescribed calibration target exists in a ranging area; In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki wherein the processor is further configured to: determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where a prescribed calibration target exists in a ranging area; (The acquisition unit 192 receives, by V2X communication (road-to-vehicle communication), whether a specific object having a feature point capable of executing calibration corresponding to two or more sensors is present in an acquirable range around the host vehicle. (paragraph 0047)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki reduces extra information when conducting calibration. Regarding claim 6, LaChapelle further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to set at least one of an amplitude of the specified range or the scan speed of the scan light, such that a scan period of the calibration mode is within an allowable period range in which a scan period of the normal ranging mode lies. (The maximum range of lidar system 100 may be any suitable distance, such as for example, 25 m, 50 m, 100 m, 200 m, 500 m, or 1 km. As a specific example, a lidar system with a 200-m maximum range may be configured to sense or identify various targets located up to 200 m away. (paragraph 0036)) Regarding claim 7, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 1 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the reflection point includes one or more reflection points having a distance from the movable object within an allowable distance range, and the processor is further configured to determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where number of the reflection points exceeds a predetermined number. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches wherein the reflection point includes one or more reflection points having a distance from the movable object within an allowable distance range, (The acquisition unit 192 receives, by V2X communication (road-to-vehicle communication), whether a specific object having a feature point capable of executing calibration corresponding to two or more sensors is present in an acquirable range around the host vehicle. (paragraph 0047)) and the processor is further configured to determine that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where number of the reflection points exceeds a predetermined number. (Accordingly, the information processing apparatus according to the present disclosure can acquire feature points necessary for calibration between sensors from a specific object. (paragraph 0127)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki allows for multiple points for calibration for better accuracy. Regarding claim 9, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 1 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause a notification device to execute notification related to execution of the calibration mode. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches wherein the processor is further configured to cause a notification device to execute notification related to execution of the calibration mode. (Then, the control unit 33 transmits a notification indicating that the target vehicle is present to the information processing apparatus 100 mounted on the vehicle having a positional relationship in which the calibration can be performed. (paragraph 0030)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki lets you know when calibration can be conducted. Regarding claim 13, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 10 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where the movable object has entered a calibration area in which execution of the calibration mode is permitted. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches wherein the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where the movable object has entered a calibration area in which execution of the calibration mode is permitted. (Subsequently, the information processing apparatus 100 determines whether the target vehicle is present in the region where the calibration can be performed based on the information of the region FV 3 (paragraph 0023)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki allows for confirmation that calibration can be conducted. Regarding claim 14, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 10 as previously stated however LaChapelle further teaches the mode execution process limits a ranging range of the calibration mode to a specified range within the ranging area, and the prescribed calibration target exists in the specified range. (The output beam of light 125 is directed downrange toward a remote target 130 located a distance D from the lidar system 100 and at least partially contained within a field of regard of the system 100. Depending on the scenario and/or the implementation of the lidar system 100, D can be between 1 m and 1 km, for example. (paragraph 0025)) LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where a prescribed calibration target exists in a ranging area, In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki wherein the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where a prescribed calibration target exists in a ranging area, (The acquisition unit 192 receives, by V2X communication (road-to-vehicle communication), whether a specific object having a feature point capable of executing calibration corresponding to two or more sensors is present in an acquirable range around the host vehicle. (paragraph 0047)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki reduces extra information when conducting calibration. Regarding claim 15, LaChapelle further teaches the mode execution process sets at least one of an amplitude of the specified range or the scan speed of the scan light, such that a scan period of the calibration mode is within an allowable period range in which a scan period of the normal ranging mode lies. (The maximum range of lidar system 100 may be any suitable distance, such as for example, 25 m, 50 m, 100 m, 200 m, 500 m, or 1 km. As a specific example, a lidar system with a 200-m maximum range may be configured to sense or identify various targets located up to 200 m away. (paragraph 0036)) Regarding claim 16, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 10 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach wherein the reflection point includes one or more reflection points having a distance from the movable object within an allowable distance range, and the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where number of the reflection points exceeds a predetermined number. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches wherein the reflection point includes one or more reflection points having a distance from the movable object within an allowable distance range, (The acquisition unit 192 receives, by V2X communication (road-to-vehicle communication), whether a specific object having a feature point capable of executing calibration corresponding to two or more sensors is present in an acquirable range around the host vehicle. (paragraph 0047)) and the determination process determines that the execution condition is satisfied in a case where number of the reflection points exceeds a predetermined number. (Accordingly, the information processing apparatus according to the present disclosure can acquire feature points necessary for calibration between sensors from a specific object. (paragraph 0127)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki allows for multiple points for calibration for better accuracy. Regarding claim 18, LaChapelle teaches all of claim 10 as previously stated however LaChapelle fails to teach a notification process that controls a notification device to execute notification related to execution of the calibration mode. In the same field of endeavor, Kazuki teaches a notification process that controls a notification device to execute notification related to execution of the calibration mode. (Then, the control unit 33 transmits a notification indicating that the target vehicle is present to the information processing apparatus 100 mounted on the vehicle having a positional relationship in which the calibration can be performed. (paragraph 0030)) It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Kazuki into the invention of LaChapelle. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose LIDAR calibration methods. The combination of LaChapelle and Kazuki lets you know when calibration can be conducted. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN J SLAUGHTER whose telephone number is (571)388-3021. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00. 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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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. /ETHAN JAKOB SLAUGHTER/Examiner, Art Unit 3648 /VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 2 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 3 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 4 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 5 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 6 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 7 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 8 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 9 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 10 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 11 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 12 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 13 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 14 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 15 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 16 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 17 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/455,733 Page 18 Art Unit: 3648
Prosecution Insights