DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to applicant’s amendment/response filed on 12/22/2025, which has been entered and made of record. Claims 1-8, 10-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8, 13, 15, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065).
Regarding claim 1, Ben-Dor discloses A system for outputting content associated with a space, the system comprising: a wearable device; one or more sensors; a processor; and a non-volatile, non-transitory memory operatively coupled to the one or more sensors and the processor (Ben-Dor, fig.1, fig.5, “[0058] In some embodiments, each AR headset (e.g., AR headset 115n as shown in FIG. 1, or the like) might include, without limitation, at least one of a processor 150, a data store 155, a speaker(s) or earpiece(s) 160 (optional), eye tracking sensor(s) 165 (optional), light source(s) 170 (optional), audio sensor(s) or microphone(s) 175 (optional), front or front-facing camera(s) 180, display screen(s) or projector(s) 185, and/or transceiver(s) 190, and/or the like. [0131] According to a set of embodiments, some or all of the procedures of such methods are performed by the computer or hardware system 500 in response to processor 510 executing one or more sequences of one or more instructions (which might be incorporated into the operating system 540 and/or other code, such as an application program 545) contained in the working memory 535”), the processor operative to:
receive, via said one or more sensors, spatial telemetry data (Ben-Dor, “[0112] In the non-limiting embodiment of FIG. 4A, method 400, at block 405, might comprise receiving, with a computing system and from one or more first image capture devices having a field of view of at least a first portion of a work environment (i.e., directed in front of an augmented reality (“AR”) headset worn by a first user, or the like), one or more first images of the at least a first portion of the work environment, the one or more first images overlapping with a field of view of eyes of the first user wearing the AR headset”);
analyze, via said processor, said spatial telemetry data; identify one or more physical objects in a physical environment (Ben-Dor, “[0114] Method 400 might further comprise analyzing, with the computing system, the received one or more first images to identify one or more first objects disposed in the work environment (block 415).”);
generate content including one or more virtual objects corresponding to the one or more physical objects detected in the physical environment and a set of instructions linked to the one or more virtual objects, the set of instructions having one or more steps for maintaining, installing, or repairing the one or more physical objects (Ben-Dor, “[0075] such as depicted in FIG. 2B, the first series of instructions 245 might include, without limitation, a graphical icon or image in the shape of a microscope slide outline 245a that, when displayed in the first image overlay, appears to the user to surround a first slide 225 among the plurality of slides 225; an image of an arrow 245b that points from the first slide 225 to a particular slot within a first container 240 (denoted as “Folder 1” in FIG. 2B); and a hologram or image of a slide 245c fitting within the particular slot within first container 240; or the like. [0076] some (or all) of the icons, images, highlighting fields, text fields, and/or the like … might be made to appear to be projected on a surface (e.g., table-top surface, wall surface, surface of an object (which can be but need not be flat), or projected as a floating hologram or floating window (or info screens), or the like, that are either stationary or movable to track motion of objects, or the like. [0085] In the case of assembling a piece of machinery or assembling an object, the computing system might identify (by the techniques described herein) the parts of the machinery or object, might query a database for assembly instructions, and might generate and display image overlays (and perhaps also generate and present aural instructions) that outline the steps (e.g., in a floating window with appropriate still diagram montages or dynamic diagrams showing how one piece is fitted with another, etc.) while also highlighting parts and tools for each step, until the machinery or object has been successfully assembled. [0115] Method 400, at block 430, might comprise generating, with the computing system, a first image overlay, the first image overlay providing one or more instructions (which might include, without limitation, at least one of a graphical icon-based instruction, a text-based instruction, an image-based instruction, or a highlighting-based instruction, and/or the like) to be presented to a user to implement the first task associated with the at least one first object”);
output said content via a display of the wearable device such that a user may interact with the virtual objects to retrieve or display information corresponding to the space (Ben-Dor, “[0119] Method 400 might further comprise, at block 440, displaying, with the computing system and to the eyes of the first user through the AR headset, the generated first image overlay that overlaps with the field of view of the eyes of the first user. [0114] a plurality of users are tasked with performing the first task, wherein each user wears an AR headset that displays generated image overlays to each user that distinguishes objects that one user is intended to interact with from objects that the other users among the plurality of users are intended to interact with as part of the first task”).
On the other hand, Ben-Dor fails to explicitly disclose but Ramani discloses record, via the one or more sensors, video of each step of the one or more steps performed by the user to yield a recording and store the recording in the non-volatile, non-transitory memory (Ramani, “[0054] Once the virtual models 34 of the physical objects, e.g., tools, parts, and the like, have been rendered on the display at their 3D positions in the virtual workspace, the user then uses the virtual hand representations 38 to manipulate the virtual models 34 to demonstrate, i.e., mimic, the performance of procedural tasks. These demonstrations are recorded and stored in the memory as augmented reality content which can be asynchronously consumed at a later time by another user, such as a novice or trainee. In one embodiment, the user's interactions with the virtual objects 34 are recorded with a script that stores the three translational coordinates for the position, four quaternion coordinates for the orientation, and a time stamp corresponding to the position”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor and Ramani, to include all limitations of claim 1. That is, adding the recording and storing procedures of Ramani to the system of Ben-Dor. The motivation/ suggestion would have been These demonstrations are recorded and stored in the memory as augmented reality content which can be asynchronously consumed at a later time by another user, such as a novice or trainee (Ramani, [0054]).
Regarding claim 3, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said display is at least partially see-through (Ben-Dor, “[0034] In some cases, displaying the generated first image overlay to the eyes of the first user through the AR headset comprises one of projecting the generated first image overlay directly in the eyes of the first user, projecting the generated first image overlay on a projection plane or surface in front of the eyes of the first user, projecting the generated first image overlay as a hologram in front of the eyes of the first user, displaying the generated first image overlay on a transparent or semi-transparent display screen of the AR headset that is disposed in front of the eyes of the first user”).
Regarding claim 4, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said wearable device is at least one of a hat and a helmet (Ben-Dor, “[0020] the AR headset might include, but is not limited to, one of a set of AR goggles, a pair of AR-enabled eyewear, an AR-enabled smartphone mounted in a headset, or an AR helmet, and/or the like”).
Regarding claim 5, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said one or more virtual objects correspond to one or more components of a machine (Ben-Dor, “[0023] the first task might include, without limitation, one of running a test sample or a tissue sample using laboratory instrumentation; assembling a piece of machinery; assembling an object; preparing a test sample or a tissue sample; identifying or tracking samples within a laboratory; instructing or guiding users regarding how to perform experimental protocols or tests in a laboratory; performing processes in a histology laboratory; performing processes in a pathologist's office; performing tasks after slide diagnosis; performing processes in a clinical or analytical laboratory; or transferring reagents or samples; and/or the like. In some cases, the one or more first objects might include, but is not limited to, one of laboratory instrumentation, laboratory tools, sample transfer devices, puzzle components or pieces, machinery parts, assembly tools, measurement tools, object parts, sample reagents, sample containers, burners, coolers, mixers, sample preparation tools, or sample transfer tools, and/or the like. In some cases, the work environment comprises one of a laboratory, a construction site, a machine shop, a workshop, a factory, or a room, and/or the like”).
Regarding claim 8, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said generating step further includes accessing a library to obtain said one or more virtual objects corresponding to said one or more physical objects (Ben-Dor, “[0019] The computing system might analyze the received one or more first images to identify one or more first objects disposed in the work environment; might query at least one database to determine a first task associated with at least one first object among the identified one or more first objects”).
Regarding claim 13, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said outputting step further includes superimposing said one or more virtual objects on said one or more physical objects (Ben-Dor, “[0029] generating, with the augmented reality (“AR”) system, image overlays (including, but not limited to, at least one of graphical icon-based overlays, text-based overlays, image-based overlays, or highlighting-based overlays, and/or the like) that are superimposed over either an actual view of an area (e.g., work environment or the like) or an image or video of the area”).
Regarding claim 15, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said output of content is an image (Ben-Dor, “[0116] In some cases, the floating text window, when displayed within the generated first image overlay, is displayed as a floating image beside the at least one first object or displayed as a floating image within the field of view of the eyes of the first user. [0119] Method 400 might further comprise, at block 440, displaying, with the computing system and to the eyes of the first user through the AR headset, the generated first image overlay that overlaps with the field of view of the eyes of the first user”).
Regarding claim 17, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said output of content is a hologram (Ben-Dor, “[0024] the actual view of the area might be viewed directly by the eyes of the user (or through only the user's personal corrective lenses), with the generated image overlays either being projected directly into the eyes of the user or being projected as a hologram in front of the eyes of the user, or the like”).
Regarding claim 19, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
Ben-Dor further discloses wherein said output of content is a series of images (Ben-Dor, “[0059] The display screen(s) and/or projector(s) 185 may be used to display or project the generated image overlays (and/or to display a composite image or video that combines the generated image overlays superimposed over images or video of the actual area).”).
Claim(s) 2, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and Fragstein et al. (US 20200298523).
Regarding claim 2, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Fragstein discloses wherein said space is a rubber finishing line (Fragstein, “[0055] It is contemplated that the novel portions of the baler press assembly 10 could be used in any type of press assembly having a press chamber. Further, the scope of the invention is not considered limited to rubber balers, but instead could be used in the compression of a wide variety of materials”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and Fragstein, to include all limitations of claim 2. That is, applying the system of Ben-Dor in view of Ramani to the rubber balers of Fragstein. The motivation/ suggestion would have been to provide augmented reality experience to user in various factories such as rubber balers (Fragstein, [0003], A change of product may require complete cleaning of equipment, sometimes requiring disassembly, particularly of balers).
Regarding claim 7, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 5.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Fragstein discloses wherein said machine is a rubber baler (Fragstein, “[0055] It is contemplated that the novel portions of the baler press assembly 10 could be used in any type of press assembly having a press chamber. Further, the scope of the invention is not considered limited to rubber balers, but instead could be used in the compression of a wide variety of materials”). The same motivation of claim 2 applies here.
Claim(s) 6, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and Cardenas Bernal (US 20180350056).
Regarding claim 6, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 5.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Cardenas Bernal discloses wherein said one or more components comprise at least one of a bolt, a washer, a nut, a frame, and a wear strip (Cardenas Bernal, “[0030] At 203, an object type is identified. For example, the type of the object of interest is identified. In some embodiments, the object type is the part type of an automotive part such as a right hand front shock tower used for a particular vehicle. In some embodiments, the object type is a body frame of a vehicle”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and Cardenas Bernal, to include all limitations of claim 6. That is, adding the frame of Cardenas Bernal to the components of Ben-Dor in view of Ramani. The motivation/ suggestion would have been to significantly increase the speed and efficiency related to manufacturing and in particular to the manufacturing of automobile parts and vehicles (Cardenas Bernal, [0002] ).
Regarding claim 18, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Cardenas Bernal discloses wherein said output of content is in the form of or generated from a digital twin (Cardenas Bernal, “[0015] As the user moves around the object, the view of the object from the perspective of the AR device and the overlaid data of the detected features adjust accordingly. [0026] In various embodiments, as the user moves around the object in view, the data displayed on top of the view of the object changes to match the movement of the user. In some embodiments, the AR device includes a borescope camera used to inspect interior surface cavities. As the borescope is manipulated to change the image captured by the borescope's camera, the view of the object and the data overlaid on the view changes accordingly”). The motivation of claim 6 applies here.
Regarding claim 20, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Cardenas Bernal discloses wherein the output step further includes guiding a user to manipulate one or more physical objects corresponding to said one or more virtual objects (Cardenas Bernal, “[0016] In various embodiments, the AR applications disclosed herein are not limited to augmented elements and may include functionality to receive user interaction and to manipulate digital components. [0026] At 107, user interaction with the object in view is processed. For example, using the AR device, the user may interact with the object in view including moving around the object and/or manipulating the data corresponding to the object. [0051] the reference data is utilized by the user interface of the AR device for interacting with and manipulating an object of interest.”). The motivation of claim 6 applies here.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and Denn (US 20210335145).
Regarding claim 10, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Denn discloses wherein said content further includes training information, said training information linked to the one or more virtual objects for training the user to operate said one or more physical objects (Denn, “[0053] The memory 138 may include a VR/AR scene generator 162 that, when executed, may receive position, orientation, and attitude data from each of a plurality of components 108, 110, 112, 114, 120, and 124, and the training system 102 may utilize the received data to determine VR scene data or AR scene data for each component and each user. The scene data may vary according to perspective and device. For example, a first user at a first location at (a first geophysical position) relative to a scene may utilize smart glasses and one or more components to interact relative to a scene including one or more AR objects (e.g., combatants, vehicles, structures, etc.) superimposed over a landscape.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and Denn, to include all limitations of claim 10. That is, adding the training of Denn to the AR system of Ben-Dor in view of Ramani. The motivation/ suggestion would have been to augmented reality training systems configured to teach a joint terminal attack controller (JTAC) and to practice battlefield coordination between the JTAC and others (Denn, [0001] ).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and XIAO et al. (US 20210124168).
Regarding claim 11, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but XIAO discloses wherein said processor is further operative to capture one or more data points associated with an interaction between the user and at least one of the physical objects and the virtual objects (XIAO, claim 23, “prompting a user who wears a locked head-mounted display device to gaze the calibration object near the calibration object; obtaining gaze point information of the user when the user gazes the calibration object performing a calibration operation based on the acquired gaze point information and real information of the calibration object”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and XIAO, to include all limitations of claim 11. That is, adding the obtaining user’s gaze point of XIAO to the AR system of Ben-Dor. The motivation/ suggestion would have been unlocking a head-mounted display device based on gaze point information (XIAO, [0001] ).
Regarding claim 12, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and XIAO discloses The system of claim 11.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but XIAO discloses wherein said one or more data points correspond to at least one of gaze, gesture, position, orientation, and movement of the user (XIAO, claim 23, “prompting a user who wears a locked head-mounted display device to gaze the calibration object near the calibration object; obtaining gaze point information of the user when the user gazes the calibration object performing a calibration operation based on the acquired gaze point information and real information of the calibration object”). The same motivation of claim 11 applies here.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and Mori (US 20210321062).
Regarding claim 14, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 1.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Mori discloses wherein said virtual objects are configured to model one or more parameters associated with said physical objects, wherein said parameters include at least one of a movement, a speed, and an operation (Mori, “Specifically, the arithmetic operation unit 103 calculates the vehicle speed of the preceding vehicle or the oncoming vehicle by subtracting the vehicle speed measured by the vehicle speed measuring unit 105 from a change in a distance to the preceding vehicle or the oncoming vehicle acquired at a different time. In S4038, the arithmetic operation unit 103 superimposedly displays the vehicle speed of the preceding vehicle or the oncoming vehicle calculated in S412 on the video. In S4038, the arithmetic operation unit 103 superimposedly displays the vehicle speed of the preceding vehicle or the oncoming vehicle calculated in S412 on the video”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and Mori, to include all limitations of claim 14. That is, adding the superimposedly displaying the speed of Mori to the AR system of Ben-Dor in view of Ramani. The motivation/ suggestion would have been to assist to determine the user’s situation, e.g., a driver of the following vehicle of the vehicle 200 can ascertain whether the following vehicle can travel in the opposite lane with sufficient time until the oncoming vehicle approaches when passing the vehicle 200 (Mori, [0036] ).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Dor et al. (US 20190362556) in view of Ramani et al. (US 20210134065) and Kumami et al. (US 20230205416).
Regarding claim 16, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani discloses The system of claim 15.
On the other hand, Ben-Dor in view of Ramani fails to explicitly disclose but Kumami discloses wherein said image is generated from drawings (Kumami, “[0167] In this case, in the second embodiment, the drawing information generating circuit 407 includes a device that generates a virtual space image to be displayed on the HMD 50, and is able to draw a drawing image by the operator of the electronic pen 10 on the virtual space image”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ben-Dor in view of Ramani and Kumami, to include all limitations of claim 16. That is, applying the drawing virtual space image of Kumami to the AR system of Ben-Dor in view of Ramani. The motivation/ suggestion would have been to provide a spatial position indication system suitable for a case where an electronic pen is used in a space (Kumami, [0001] ).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant submitted: Ben-Dor discloses providing augmented reality (AR)-based assistance within a work environment via an AR headset. Ben-Dor, Abstract. More specifically, a computing system receives images overlapping with a field of view of the AR headset and generates and displays an image overlay in the AR headset based on the field of view. Id. The image overlay provides instructions associated with a physical object (e.g., "tray, container, instrumentation, tool, or other object") in the work environment. [0037], [0115]. In contrast, Applicant's amended claims recite generating content including "one or more virtual objects ... and a set of instructions linked to one or more virtual objects." Additionally, as recited by the Office Action at page 4, Ben-Dor discloses that the image overlay distinguishes physical objects that one user is intended to interact with from objects that the other users are intended to interact with. [0014]. This is not Applicant's outputting content "such that a user may interact with the virtual objects." (Remarks, pages 6-7)
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Ben-Dor discloses “[0075] such as depicted in FIG. 2B, the first series of instructions 245 might include, without limitation, a graphical icon or image in the shape of a microscope slide outline 245a that, when displayed in the first image overlay, appears to the user to surround a first slide 225 among the plurality of slides 225; an image of an arrow 245b that points from the first slide 225 to a particular slot within a first container 240 (denoted as “Folder 1” in FIG. 2B); and a hologram or image of a slide 245c fitting within the particular slot within first container 240; or the like”. Ben-Dor further discloses “[0076] some (or all) of the icons, images, highlighting fields, text fields, and/or the like might be made to flash, blink, vibrate, and/or change color to attract the attention of the user, or to emphasize importance or priority, or the like. In some cases, some (or all) of the icons, images, highlighting fields, text fields, and/or the like might be made to appear to be projected on a surface (e.g., table-top surface, wall surface, surface of an object (which can be but need not be flat), or projected as a floating hologram or floating window (or info screens), or the like, that are either stationary or movable to track motion of objects, or the like.” For instance, the outline 245a in fig. 2B corresponds to the virtual object, which is associated with the physical object (i.e., first slide 225). The user interaction is between the user and the virtual object and physical object.
The remaining of Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8, 10-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 GRACE Q LI whose telephone number is (571)270-0497. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, DEVONA FAULK can be reached at 571-272-7515. 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.
/GRACE Q LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618 3/7/2026