CTFR 18/524,588 CTFR 82747 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. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: data gathering unit in claims 12-13; data analysis unit in claims 12; connection unit in claims 13-14; and data analysis system in claims 13-14. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 4, 7-9, 12, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Jiang et al. (CN103558003A) . Considering claim 1, Jiang discloses a method for identification of lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine, in which method: - torsional excitation is produced by a frequency converter 1 driving the electric machine, said torsional excitation effecting lateral vibration in said electric machine (Figures 1-3; [0020]); and - lateral vibration of excitation response from said electric machine is measured by one or more vibration sensors 10, 13, 15, 19, 21, 24, 27 and 30 as lateral vibration data (Figures 1 and 3; [0022]; [0018]); - wherein lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation ([0012], wherein the vibration monitoring and analysis system can monitor the lateral vibration and torsional vibration of the rotor in real time, and can also store and playback data, which is convenient for studying the lateral vibration and torsional vibration characteristics of the rotor system under torsional vibration excitation and the coupling relationship between lateral vibration and torsional vibration). Considering claim 4, Jiang discloses that the torsional excitation comprises torsional excitation in the form of an impulse, random noise, pseudo random noise, a harmonic torsional excitation or a harmonic torsional excitation sweep ([0021]; Sinusoidal signal in range of 1 Hz to 1 kHz). Considering claim 7, Jiang discloses an arrangement for identification of lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine, said arrangement comprising: - a frequency converter 1/3 (Figures 1-2 and 4; [0018]; [0020]; [0023]); - one or more vibration sensors 10, 13, 15, 19, 21, 24, 27, 30 and an electric machine 6 (Figures 1 and 3; [0022]; [0018]). - wherein said frequency converter 1/3 is driving the electric machine and is arranged for producing torsional excitation, said torsional excitation effecting lateral vibration in said electric machine (Figure 4; [0020]; [0023]); and - wherein said one or more vibration sensors at least one lateral vibration sensor arranged for measuring the lateral vibration from said electric machine as excitation response and for producing lateral vibration data (X and Y direction vibration sensors [0018]; [0022]; Figures 1 and 3). Considering claim 8, Jiang discloses that said at least one lateral vibration sensor is arranged to measure lateral vibration at least in the horizontal direction (X direction vibration sensors [0018]; [0022]; Figures 1 and 3). Considering claim 9, Jiang discloses that said frequency converter 1/3 is arranged for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine with the help of said lateral vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation ([0012], wherein the vibration monitoring and analysis system can monitor the lateral vibration and torsional vibration of the rotor in real time, and can also store and playback data, which is convenient for studying the lateral vibration and torsional vibration characteristics of the rotor system under torsional vibration excitation and the coupling relationship between lateral vibration and torsional vibration; Figures 1-2 and 4; [0023]). Considering claim 12, Jiang discloses that said frequency converter comprises: - a data gathering unit arranged for gathering data, said gathered data including control data for said electric machine and lateral vibration data of said electric machine (Figures 1-2 and 4; [0020]; [0023]); and - a data analysis unit arranged for analyzing said gathered data and for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of said electric machine and/or the condition of said electric machine (Figures 1 and 4; [0020]; [0023]). Considering claim 16, Jiang discloses that torsional excitation comprises torsional excitation in the form of an impulse, random noise, pseudo random noise, a harmonic torsional excitation or a harmonic torsional excitation sweep ([0021]; Sinusoidal signal in range of 1 Hz to 1 kHz). Considering claim 15, Jiang discloses a frequency converter 1/3 (Figures 1-2 and 4; [0018]; [0020]; [0023]) of an arrangement for identification of lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine, said arrangement comprising: - one or more vibration sensors 10, 13, 15, 19, 21, 24, 27, 30 and an electric machine 6 (Figures 1 and 3; [0022]; [0018]). - wherein said frequency converter 1/3 is driving the electric machine and is arranged for producing torsional excitation, said torsional excitation effecting lateral vibration in said electric machine (Figure 4; [0020]; [0023]); and - wherein said one or more vibration sensors at least one lateral vibration sensor arranged for measuring the lateral vibration from said electric machine as excitation response and for producing lateral vibration data (X and Y direction vibration sensors [0018]; [0022]; Figures 1 and 3). Considering claim 19, Jiang discloses that said frequency converter 1/3 is arranged for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine with the help of said lateral vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation ([0012], wherein the vibration monitoring and analysis system can monitor the lateral vibration and torsional vibration of the rotor in real time, and can also store and playback data, which is convenient for studying the lateral vibration and torsional vibration characteristics of the rotor system under torsional vibration excitation and the coupling relationship between lateral vibration and torsional vibration; Figures 1-2 and 4; [0023]) . 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 3, 5, 10, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN103558003A) in view of Agilent (NPL - The Fundamentals of Modal Testing - Application Note 243 – 3) . Considering claim 3, Jiang fails to disclose generating one or more FRF utilizing both the lateral vibration data and the excitation data. However, Agilent teaches that one or more frequency response functions (H(w) = Y(w)/X(w), Pages 11-12 and 14) are generated utilizing vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation (Feature already provided by Jiang); and lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions (Pages 6-14; generally teach that frequency response functions from measured excitation data and measured vibration/acceleration response data are used to identify dynamic and vibrational characteristics of a structure). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generating one or more FRF utilizing both the lateral vibration data and the data of the produced torsional excitation, whereby lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions, as taught by Agilent, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is to improve the diagnostic insight obtained from the measured data by applying known analytical techniques according to well-established function. Considering claim 5, Jiang fails to disclose that that lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine comprise the modal parameters of the electric machine. However, Agilent teaches that the characteristics derived from the frequency response functions include modal parameters (Page 15, “modal analysis software”; Pages 38-47, entire section discussing modal parameter estimation based on frequency response function measurements). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the modal parameter determination of Agilent in the invention by Jiang for the purpose of identifying lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine. The motivation for doing so, as understood in the art, is to identify resonant frequency of the vibration to prevent excitation of lateral modes and to monitor for compliance with vibration limits at operating speeds. Considering claim 10, Jiang fails to disclose that the frequency converter is arranged for generating one or more frequency response functions utilizing said lateral vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation; and for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions. However, Agilent teaches that one or more frequency response functions (H(w) = Y(w)/X(w), Pages 11-12 and 14) are generated utilizing vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation (Feature already provided by Jiang); and lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions (Pages 6-14; generally teach that frequency response functions from measured excitation data and measured vibration/acceleration response data are used to identify dynamic and vibrational characteristics of a structure). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generating one or more FRF utilizing both the lateral vibration data and the data of the produced torsional excitation, whereby lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions, as taught by Agilent, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is to improve the diagnostic insight obtained from the measured data by applying known analytical techniques according to well-established function. Considering claim 17, Jiang fails to disclose that that lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine comprise the modal parameters of the electric machine. However, Agilent teaches that the characteristics derived from the frequency response functions include modal parameters (Page 15, “modal analysis software”; Pages 38-47, entire section discussing modal parameter estimation based on frequency response function measurements). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the modal parameter determination of Agilent in the invention by Jiang for the purpose of identifying lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine. The motivation for doing so, as understood in the art, is to identify resonant frequency of the vibration to prevent excitation of lateral modes and to monitor for compliance with vibration limits at operating speeds. Considering claim 20, Jiang fails to disclose that the frequency converter is arranged for generating one or more frequency response functions utilizing said lateral vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation; and for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions. However, Agilent teaches that one or more frequency response functions (H(w) = Y(w)/X(w), Pages 11-12 and 14) are generated utilizing vibration data and excitation data, said excitation data comprising data of the produced torsional excitation (Feature already provided by Jiang); and lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions (Pages 6-14; generally teach that frequency response functions from measured excitation data and measured vibration/acceleration response data are used to identify dynamic and vibrational characteristics of a structure). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generating one or more FRF utilizing both the lateral vibration data and the data of the produced torsional excitation, whereby lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine are identified with the help of said lateral vibration data and said generated one or more frequency response functions, as taught by Agilent, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is to improve the diagnostic insight obtained from the measured data by applying known analytical techniques according to well-established function . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN103558003A) in view of Elliott (US 2023/0213375 A1) . Considering claim 6, Jiang fails to disclose that the condition of the electric machine is analyzed and determined utilizing said identified lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine. However, Elliott teaches monitoring a condition of an electrical machine, including generators and motors ([0001-2]), whereby vibrations of the machine are detected by vibrations sensor 11 (Figure 1; [0007]; [0059]), and the vibrations are converted to frequency response spectrum ([0061]), whereby the frequency response spectrum is compared to a model spectrum to determine a fault ([0063]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize vibration characteristics to identify a condition of a machine, as taught by Elliott, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is to provide fault detection, as made clear by Elliott. Considering claim 18, Jiang fails to disclose that the condition of the electric machine is analyzed and determined utilizing said identified lateral vibration characteristics of the electric machine. However, Elliott teaches monitoring a condition of an electrical machine, including generators and motors ([0001-2]), whereby vibrations of the machine are detected by vibrations sensor 11 (Figure 1; [0007]; [0059]), and the vibrations are converted to frequency response spectrum ([0061]), whereby the frequency response spectrum is compared to a model spectrum to determine a fault ([0063]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize vibration characteristics to identify a condition of a machine, as taught by Elliott, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is to provide fault detection, as made clear by Elliott . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN103558003A) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2013/0006540 A1) . The invention by Jiang discloses that the vibration sensors are very close to the shaft bearing mounts of the electric machine, and thus fails to disclose that they are attached to at least one bearing of said electric machine. However, Sakaguchi teaches mounting at least one vibration sensor 70 attached to a bearing 60 of an electric machine (Figure 1; [0047]; [0049]; [0051]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize at least one vibration sensor on the bearings in the invention by Jiang, as taught by Sakaguchi. The motivation for doing so is to provide an indication of abnormality of the bearing itself, as suggested by Sakaguchi ([0051]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN103558003A) in view of Krishnamoorthi et al. (US 2019/0204390 A1) . Considering claim 13, Jiang discloses a data analysis system 3 arranged for analyzing said gathered data and for identifying the lateral vibration characteristics of said electric machine and/or the condition of said electric machine, a frequency converter 1, and a data gathering unit for gathering data, including lateral vibration data of said electric machine (data collectors; [0023]), but fails to explicitly disclose gathering control data and a connection unit for transmitting the gathered data to the data analysis system. However, Krishnamoorthi teaches a data analysis system 160/220 having a motor driver 230 and a data gathering unit 170/150 for gathering data ([0020]; [0024-25]), including control data (via 230) for the electric motors 110,120,130 ([0028]) and vibration data ([0017]; [0020]; [0031]) and a connection unit arranged for transmitting said gathered data to said data analysis system 160/220 ([0020], wireless transmission to the gateway 170 or mobile device 150 ([0024-25]) from the motors 110,120,130 and from the gateway to the server 160). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to remotely process the control data and vibration data, as suggested by Krishnamoorthi, in the invention by Jiang. The motivation for doing so is that remote processing allows for great computational power while minimizing the power consumption at the source, which a well understood advantage of cloud computing . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art made of record fails to disclose, suggest or otherwise render obvious the subject matter of an arrangement for identification of lateral vibration characteristics of an electric machine having a user apparatus that receives control data for said electric machine from a connection unit, receives lateral vibration data of said electric machine from said one or more vibration sensors and for receiving said gathered data from said connection unit and for forwarding said gathered data together with said lateral vibration data to said data analysis system. The invention by Krishnamoorthi uses a combination of user apparatus and gateway to provide control data for an electric machine and measurement data from the electric machine to a data analysis system, whereby the current claim requires the user apparatus to collect all data and transmit it to the data analysis system . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 5/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, beginning on page 9 of the response, that Jiang fails to disclose a frequency converter driving the electric machine. Applicant argues that under a broadest reasonable interpretation, in view of the specification, a frequency converter is only used in the context of AC motors. Since the invention by Jiang is a DC motor that has a signal generator applying “an alternating output” that is combined with a DC signal to drive the DC motor, Applicant argues that there is simply no frequency converter being used. However, the original specification ([0034]) makes it clear that the frequency converter is required to produce torsional excitation in the form of “an impulse, random noise, pseudo random noise, a harmonic torsional excitation or a harmonic torsional excitation sweep”. Since Jiang clearly expresses that the signal generator provides a sinusoidal signal in the range of 1 Hz to 1 kHz ([0021]), it is sufficient to show that the signal generator provides at least one of the outputs expected of a claimed frequency converter, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, in view of the specification. Therefore, the signal generator providing an alternating output across a range of frequencies does anticipate the claimed frequency converter under a broadest reasonable interpretation, in view of the specification. Accordingly, this argument is unpersuasive. Continuing on page 10, Applicant argues that Jiang does not drive the electric machine under test with the frequency converter. However, this is in direct contradiction to the statement of Jiang in at least the abstract thereof, and as previously presented by the Applicant in their previous argument, where it is provided that the alternating signal overlapping with output signal of the DC power supply is the input of the DC motor. Therefore, this argument is wholly unpersuasive as being inaccurate. The reminder of the arguments on pages 10-12 are related to the same basic argument against Jiang. Having already addresses the drive-delivered torsion excitation using a frequency converter, these arguments are also considered unpersuasive. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Jonathan M Dunlap whose telephone number is (571)270-1335. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10AM - 7PM. 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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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. /JONATHAN M DUNLAP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 May 30, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 2 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 3 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 4 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 5 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 6 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 7 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 8 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 9 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 10 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 11 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 12 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 13 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 14 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 15 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 16 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 17 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 18 Art Unit: 2855 Application/Control Number: 18/524,588 Page 19 Art Unit: 2855
Prosecution Insights