DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
Applicant amended claim 11 to replace the term “processing unit” with the term “processor.” In view of the amendment, claim 11 is no longer being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moha (US 20120182316) in view of Svendsen (US 20160019414).
Regarding claim 1:
Moha discloses: a method for operating an electronic device to browse a collection of images (FIG. 4; abstract: “Assisted face selection is disclosed. According to some implementations, a method can include obtaining contact information associated with a contact and displaying on an interface of a computing device an image (e.g., a thumbnail image) representative of the contact”),
wherein said method comprises:
storing a collection of images in a storage medium (¶ [0030] “Images 302-316 may be stored on a local storage device or a network storage device.”; ¶ [0048] “…automatic face selection process 600 may be performed automatically in response to storing new images on a storage device, adding new images to an image library or capturing a new image with an image capture device, such as a camera”).
acquiring a picture with a camera of the electronic device (¶ [0009] “capturing a new image of the contact with an image capture device, performing facial recognition on the new image and one or more other images to identify other images that contain a facial view of the contact, and displaying the other images and the new image”; ¶ [0010] “capturing an image of a contact, determining whether the captured image includes a facial view of the contact using facial recognition”; ¶ [0023] “user interface 200 may be used to capture a photograph of a contact to be used as the image representing the contact”; and ¶ [0040] “The contact-representative or known image may be an image currently displayed as image 110 or an image captured with an image capture device (e.g., a camera) using interface 200. Facial recognition analysis may be performed on images available to the system based on the face-identifying information for the contact's face in order to find other images that include the contact's face.”; ¶ [0048] “…automatic face selection process 600 may be performed automatically in response to storing new images on a storage device, adding new images to an image library or capturing a new image with an image capture device, such as a camera”).
determining a target person, said target person being a person represented in an acquired picture (¶ [0009] “capturing a new image of the contact with an image capture device, performing facial recognition on the new image and one or more other images to identify other images that contain a facial view of the contact, and displaying the other images and the new image”; ¶ [0010] “capturing an image of a contact, determining whether the captured image includes a facial view of the contact using facial recognition”; ¶ [0023] “user interface 200 may be used to capture a photograph of a contact to be used as the image representing the contact”; and ¶ [0040] “The contact-representative or known image may be an image currently displayed as image 110 or an image captured with an image capture device (e.g., a camera) using interface 200. Facial recognition analysis may be performed on images available to the system based on the face-identifying information for the contact's face in order to find other images that include the contact's face.”; ¶ [0048] “…automatic face selection process 600 may be performed automatically in response to storing new images on a storage device, adding new images to an image library or capturing a new image with an image capture device, such as a camera”);
automatically adapting a subset of said collection of images based on people represented in said images as a function of said target person (¶ [0008] “automatically determining that one or more images correspond to the contact and automatically selecting one based on metadata”); ¶ [0039] “other images corresponding to the contact are determined by analyzing metadata”; ¶ [0048] “…automatic face selection process 600 may be performed automatically in response to storing new images on a storage device, adding new images to an image library or capturing a new image with an image capture device, such as a camera”);
While Moha teaches wherein said adapting comprises selecting said subset of said collection of images (¶ [0039] “At block 408, other images corresponding to the contact are determined. For example, in response to receiving the indication to change the contact-representative image at block 406, other images accessible to the system are analyzed to determine whether the other images correspond to the contact. Other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by analyzing metadata associated with the other images…”; ¶ [0040] “…other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by performing facial recognition analysis on the images…an image currently representing a contact, or an image known to include the contact, may be analyzed using a facial recognition algorithm to determine face-identifying information for the contact's face…corresponding images 410 may be determined based on metadata associated with other images or facial recognition analysis of other images. Any suitable known Facial recognition algorithm or analysis can be used”); and/or sorting said subset of said collection of images (¶ [0031] “Images 302-318 may be arranged on interface 300 with the image currently representing the contact (e.g., image 318) at the center of the arrangement and the other images (images 302-316) arranged around image 318… images 302-316 are arranged in chronological, or reverse chronological, order. For example, the metadata associated with images 302-316 may be analyzed to determine when the images were captured and the images may be arranged around image 318 in chronological, or reverse chronological, order from left to right, top to bottom. In some implementations, images 302-316 are arranged according to ranking. For example, images 302-316 may be arranged around image 318 according to a user-assigned ranking associated with the images. The images may be arranged according to ranking from left to right, top to bottom with the highest ranked images at the top left and the lowest ranking at bottom right. In some implementations, images 302-316 may be arranged according to an event associated with the images. For example, the images displayed together on user interface 300 may be images from a single event. The user may be able to select which events the user is interested in and display only the images from the selected event. In some implementations, images 302-316 can be displayed in three dimensions in a three-dimensional user interface”; and ¶ [0048]-[0050] disclose automatic face selection process may be performed automatically; images corresponding to a contact are determined; an image is automatically selected)
Moha does not specifically teach: wherein subset comprises images representing at least one person different from said target person and said subset is selected based on a relationship between said target person and said people represented in the images.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Svendsen teaches: said subset comprises images representing at least one person different from said target person and said subset is selected based on a relationship between said target person and said people represented in the images (¶ [0004] “…selecting from among a group of digital images, those images that are most likely to be of interest to the viewer… Using the relationship information present in the account records, the social distance between each identified face in the index is obtained. Using this information to predict affinity, the system operates to compute a composite score for each image in the collection by accumulating the individual affinity predictions between the viewer and each subject identified in each image… with the higher scoring images being selected for presentation on the display device”; ¶ [0005] “…selecting at least one image from the collection of images based on the image affinity for each of the plurality of images”; ¶ [0076] “…face 001 contains links to images 288 and 290. Likewise, image 290 contains links to the reference face image 280 for subject 001 and face image 282 for subject 002”; ¶ [0077] “…Subject affinity is an indication of the strength of the relationship and desirability of one subject for another”; Also see ¶¶ [0086] – [0088] that teach converting to subject to subject affinity information, and returned to the display device 418 and assembles an image playlist from viewer to image affinity matrix).
displaying, on an interface of the device, said subset of said collection of images, the displayed subset of images being arranged according to said adapting (Moha ¶ [0041] “At block 412, corresponding images 410 are displayed. For example, corresponding images 410 may be presented to a user on user interface 300 of FIG. 3. Corresponding images 410 may be displayed on user interface 300 as images 302-316” Moha ¶¶ [0033] – [0034] disclose previous/next page controls and scroll bars for navigating additional images, and Svendsen ¶¶ [0004], [0068], and [0088] disclose sorting and scoring the selected images and assembling them into an image playlist for presentation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moha to incorporate the teachings of Svendsen by including selecting and arranging candidate images based on affinity/relationship information between Moha’s identified target person and other persons represented in the images in order to improve the relevance and personalization of the images presented for browsing and reduced manual searching through unrelated images.
Regarding claim 3:
Moha further discloses: further comprising performing on at least one of said images a face recognition algorithm in order to recognize at least one person in said at least one of said images (¶ [0040] “…other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by performing facial recognition analysis on the images…an image currently representing a contact, or an image known to include the contact, may be analyzed using a facial recognition algorithm to determine face-identifying information for the contact's face…corresponding images 410 may be determined based on metadata associated with other images or facial recognition analysis of other images. Any suitable known Facial recognition algorithm or analysis can be used”).
Regarding claim 4:
Moha further discloses: wherein performing, on the at least one of said images, said face recognition algorithm comprises determining parameters characterizing a face of a person represented in said image, the adapting of the subset being performed based on said parameters (¶ [0040] “…other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by performing facial recognition analysis on the images… Facial recognition analysis may be performed on images available to the system based on the face-identifying information for the contact's face in order to find other images that include the contact's face. Thus, corresponding images 410 may be determined based on metadata associated with other images or facial recognition analysis of other images. Any suitable known Facial recognition algorithm or analysis can be used, including but not limited to techniques employing one or more of Principal Component Analysis, Linear Discriminate Analysis, Elastic Bunch Graph Matching, Hidden Markov model, and neuronal motivated dynamic link matching”. All of these techniques involve parameters such as facial landmarks or feature vectors. ).
Regarding claim 5:
Moha further discloses: wherein contact details of at least one known person are associated, in the electronic device, with a reference face of said known person and/or with parameters characterizing said reference face, the adapting of the subset being performed based on said reference face and/or said parameters (¶ [0036] “…At block 402, contact information 400 is obtained. For example, contact information may be obtained from an address book application, a chat application, or another application that maintains, uses or stores contact information. Contact information may be obtained from a storage device, such as a local hard drive or network drive, for example. According to some implementations, contact information may include an image that currently represents the contact. In some implementations, contact information includes location information for retrieving an image currently representing the contact. Contact information may include contact identifying information, such as names, addresses (e-mail and/or physical) and phone numbers, for example”; ¶ [0040] “…other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by performing facial recognition analysis on the images… Facial recognition analysis may be performed on images available to the system based on the face-identifying information for the contact's face in order to find other images that include the contact's face. Thus, corresponding images 410 may be determined based on metadata associated with other images or facial recognition analysis of other images. Any suitable known Facial recognition algorithm or analysis can be used, including but not limited to techniques employing one or more of Principal Component Analysis, Linear Discriminate Analysis, Elastic Bunch Graph Matching, Hidden Markov model, and neuronal motivated dynamic link matching”. All of these techniques involve parameters such as facial landmarks or feature vectors. ).
Regarding claim 6:
Moha further discloses: wherein adapting the subset of said collection of images comprises selecting said subset of said collection of images based on people represented in the images as a function of said target person, in particular selecting the subset of said collection of images representing said target person (¶ [0039] “At block 408, other images corresponding to the contact are determined. For example, in response to receiving the indication to change the contact-representative image at block 406, other images accessible to the system are analyzed to determine whether the other images correspond to the contact. Other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by analyzing metadata associated with the other images…”; ¶ [0040] “…other images may be determined to correspond to the contact by performing facial recognition analysis on the images…an image currently representing a contact, or an image known to include the contact, may be analyzed using a facial recognition algorithm to determine face-identifying information for the contact's face…corresponding images 410 may be determined based on metadata associated with other images or facial recognition analysis of other images. Any suitable known Facial recognition algorithm or analysis can be used”).
Regarding claim 7:
Moha further discloses: wherein adapting the subset of said collection of images comprises sorting said subset of said collection of images based on people represented in the images as a function of said target person (¶ [0031] “Images 302-318 may be arranged on interface 300 with the image currently representing the contact (e.g., image 318) at the center of the arrangement and the other images (images 302-316) arranged around image 318… images 302-316 are arranged in chronological, or reverse chronological, order. For example, the metadata associated with images 302-316 may be analyzed to determine when the images were captured and the images may be arranged around image 318 in chronological, or reverse chronological, order from left to right, top to bottom. In some implementations, images 302-316 are arranged according to ranking. For example, images 302-316 may be arranged around image 318 according to a user-assigned ranking associated with the images. The images may be arranged according to ranking from left to right, top to bottom with the highest ranked images at the top left and the lowest ranking at bottom right. In some implementations, images 302-316 may be arranged according to an event associated with the images. For example, the images displayed together on user interface 300 may be images from a single event. The user may be able to select which events the user is interested in and display only the images from the selected event. In some implementations, images 302-316 can be displayed in three dimensions in a three-dimensional user interface)” and
displaying, on an interface of the device, said subset of said collection of images, the displayed subset of images being arranged according to said adapting (¶ [0041] “At block 412, corresponding images 410 are displayed. For example, corresponding images 410 may be presented to a user on user interface 300 of FIG. 3. Corresponding images 410 may be displayed on user interface 300 as images 302-316”).
Regarding claim 9:
Moha further discloses: wherein said target person is determined as being the person currently using the device (¶ [0052] “…a computing device may be coupled to an image capture device. A new image may be captured using the image capture device. Facial recognition analysis may be performed on the new image to determine if the contact's face can be recognized in the new image”).
Regarding claims 11-12 and 14: the claims limitations are encompassed and in similar limitations in claim 1; therefore, rejected in the same manner as applied above. See the system in FIG . 7 of Moha and ¶ [0053] for the CRM.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moha (US 20120182316) in view of Lee (US 20100238191).
Regarding claim 2:
Moha discloses the limitations of claim 1.
While Moha teaches a trigger operation in (¶ [0038] “ At block 406, an indication to change the contact-representative image is received. For example, a user may provide input selecting image 110 of FIG. 1 to indicate that the user wishes to change the image”)
Moha does not specifically teach: further comprising detecting a trigger event performed by a user on the electronic device, the determining of the target person being performed in response to said detection of the trigger event.
However, in a related field, Lee teaches: further comprising detecting a trigger event performed by a user on the electronic device (FIG. 5, ¶ [0027 “…A signal may be received to select one of the facial regions. The selected facial region may belong to a specific cluster of faces and the specific cluster of faces may be associated with a specific album of the albums”)
the determining of the target person being performed in response to said detection of the trigger event (FIG. 5, ¶ [0027 “…A signal may be received to select one of the facial regions. The selected facial region may belong to a specific cluster of faces and the specific cluster of faces may be associated with a specific album of the albums”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moha to incorporate the teachings of Lee by including: further comprising detecting a trigger event performed by a user on the electronic device, the determining of the target person being performed in response to said detection of the trigger event in order to improve Moha’s contact-image workflow, the combination would have been motivated to adopt Lee’s people-browsing trigger to that identification of the person occurs in response to a user selection.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moha (US 20120182316) in view of Svendsen (US 20160019414) and Weng (US 20100226584).
Regarding claim 8:
Moha in view of Svendsen does not specifically teach: wherein adapting a subset of said collection of images is performed according to a given criterion about said people represented in the images with respect to the target person, said given criterion being in particular an intimacy link level between the target person and said people represented in the images
However, in a related field, Weng teaches: wherein adapting a subset of said collection of images is performed according to a given criterion about said people represented in the images with respect to the target person (FIG. 3, and ¶ [0007] “…a method of browsing face regions in digital images in a photo displaying system comprises detecting a plurality of face regions from a plurality of images, grouping the face regions into a plurality of clusters based on similarities of the face regions”);
said given criterion being in particular an intimacy link level between the target person and said people represented in the images (FIG. 3, and ¶ [0007] “…determining a degree of connection between the clusters, modifying the degree of connection between the clusters according to a relationship of the face regions, and displaying the face regions according to the degree of connection between the clusters”; ¶ [0035] “…The degrees of connection between the clusters are determined based on the similarity analysis on the face regions in Step 304 shown in FIG. 3. “… In Step 306 shown in FIG. 3, a relationship between the cluster "Person B" and the cluster "Person C" is determined from the social information of the group photos. Because specific groups of people, such as friends, classmates, or family members, will take photos together, the face regions from the cluster "Person B" and the cluster "Person C" are from photos with the other face regions that are grouped in the common clusters. More particularly, the face regions from the clusters "Person B" and "Person A" appear in the same Image A, and the face regions from the clusters "Person C" and "Person A" appear in the same Image B. Although the clusters "Person B" and "Person C" are not identified as the same cluster in the previous analysis, the social information obtained from the group photos infer that the cluster "Person B" and the cluster "Person C" represent the same person. In Step 306 shown in FIG. 3, the degree of connection between any two clusters is modified according to the relationship of the face regions. Similarly, the face regions from the cluster "Person B", "Person D" and "Person E" appear in the same Image C, and the face regions from the clusters "Person C", "Person D" and "Person E" appear in the same Image D. Higher number of common faces in two clusters represents a higher degree of connection. Higher number of common persons from the same images, e.g. the face region R6 and the face region R7 are from the same Image C, may also represent higher degree of connection. In other words, the probability of the two clusters representing the same person is increased. Similarly, if faces of common clusters are from the same album, this may also represent higher degree of connection”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moha in view of Svendsen to incorporate the teachings of Weng by including: wherein adapting a subset of said collection of images is performed according to a given criterion about said people represented in the images with respect to the target person, said given criterion being in particular an intimacy link level between the target person and said people represented in the images in order to improve relevance and show images involving people most connected to the target person first.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moha (US 20120182316) in view of Svendsen (US 20160019414) and Zhao (US 20170076077).
Regarding claim 15:
Moha in view of Svendsen does not specifically teach: wherein the person is a person using the electronic device, the camera is a front camera of the electronic device and acquiring the picture comprises acquiring the picture of the person using the electronic device with the front camera of the electronic device.
However, in a related field, Zhao teaches: wherein the person is a person using the electronic device, the camera is a front camera of the electronic device and acquiring the picture comprises acquiring the picture of the person using the electronic device with the front camera of the electronic device (¶ [0013] “The device 1 may have an exterior front face in which there is a front-facing camera 3 and a display screen 4. As will be more fully explained below, camera 3 is used to capture an image of the device user 2 while the user is facing the display screen 4”; ¶ [0027] “…the device will capture an image using its camera (e.g., the front-facing camera 3 of FIG. 1) (block 31). The device will then analyze the image to determine whether a user's face is present in the image (block 32). If a user's face is detected, the device repeats the operations of capturing and analyzing an image until a user's face is not detected for a predetermined period of a time or until the user interacts with or moves the device.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moha in view of Svendsen to incorporate the teachings of Zhao by including: wherein the person is a person using the electronic device, the camera is a front camera of the electronic device and acquiring the picture comprises acquiring the picture of the person using the electronic device with the front camera of the electronic device in order to improve the person selection step in the Moha system, allowing the device to automatically browse and retrieve stored images of the person who is presently using the device, with no change in the basic operation of the underlying image selection framework.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9, 11-12, 14, and 15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable
over claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15 of copending Application No. 18568998 (reference application); and/or
over claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15 of copending Application No. 18568998 (reference application) in view of cited prior art below including Moha (US 20120182316), Lee (US 20100238191), Weng (US 20100226584), and Zhao (US 20170076077). Motivation to combine these references with reference patent is similar to those found throughout the office action below.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims at issue are encompassed in the claims of the reference application and/or encompassed in the claims of the reference application in view of the cited prior art.
For example:
Instant claims
Reference claims
1
1+7+11 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
2
2 in view of (Lee, Moha, and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
3
3 in view of (Moha to the extent necessary)
4
4 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
5
5 (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
6
1+7+11 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
7
1+11 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
8
8+9 (Moha and Svendsen and Weng to the extent necessary)
9
10 (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
11
12 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
12
12+13 in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
14
15 in in view of (Moha and Svendsen to the extent necessary)
15
1+11 in view of (Moha, Svendsen and Zhao to the extent necessary)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 rejection 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.
Applicant’s arguments, see the remarks, filed 07/02/2026, with respect to the 101 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WASSIM MAHROUKA whose telephone number is (571)272-2945. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Stephen Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. 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.
/WASSIM MAHROUKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights