CTFR 18/645,520 CTFR 94858 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. DETAILED ACTION 07-03-fti AIA The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. This office action is in response to the documents filed on 02/05/2026. Claims 1, 9, 11 and 20 have been amended. Claims 14 – 19 are canceled. Claims 20 – 26 are new. Claims 1 – 13 and 20 – 26 dated by 02/05/2026 are pending for consideration. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments in Arguments/Remarks filed on 02/05/2026 (hereafter Remarks) referring to the Office Action on 11/05/2025 (hereafter OA) have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new ground of rejection. 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1 – 13 and 20 – 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Pattabhi (US 20250004813) (hereafter Pattabhi), in view of Madiraju et al. (US 20250265350) (hereafter Madiraju), in view of Gutierrez et al. (US 20230252233) (hereafter Gutierrez) and in view of Jung et al (US 20220108023) (hereafter Jung). As per claim 1 Pattabhi discloses: A computing platform comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to ( Pattabhi , in para. [0023] discloses a system, i.e., platform, comprising processor to execute predefined instructions, memory storing executable instructions, communication unit/interface [0072]): receive a docker image from a user device; scan the docker image, wherein the scanning identifies one or more vulnerabilities associated with the docker image ( Pattabhi , [0022]: the step of scanning of the docker image further includes launching a docker image and running the scan operations using docker command which performs the scan tasks for at least one of: operating system (OS) misconfigurations, software vulnerabilities and malware and ransomware scan); Pattabhi does not explicitly disclose: generation and processing of a common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVE) list. However, Madiraju discloses: generate a common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVE) list based on the one or more vulnerabilities that were identified by the scanning ( Madiraju , [0079]: common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report 301 is an example of vulnerability report 223. In this example, CVE report 301 is comprised of text and can be in a comma-separated values (CSV) format. This report CVE contains an identification of one or more vulnerabilities and a description of the vulnerabilities.); It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi , in view of teaching of Madiraju because they both disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi for teaching of Madiraju for generation and processing the common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report in order to improve security in the system. [incorporate the CVE list into the docker image by adding a file containing the CVE list to the docker image; ] Pattabhi as modified does not explicitly disclose: creation of metadata including respective data blocks identifiers, data file encryption and processing in the blockchain system. However, Gutierrez discloses: encrypt the docker image using a symmetric encryption process; send, to a docker image storage system, the encrypted docker image and commands, that when received by the docker image storage system, cause the docker image storage system to store the encrypted docker image ( Gutierrez in para. [0222] discloses the Code Package comprising various code packages, images stored in memory; Gutierrez in para. [0224] discloses the Code Package running Docker images as container specific images; Gutierrez , in para. [0207] discloses Code Package running encryption algorithm over input data, i.e., docker image files); receive a code corresponding to the encrypted docker image from the docker image storage system ( Gutierrez in para. [0222, 0224] discloses the Code Package included in a Standard Knowledge Language, SKL, engine communicating with the memory and running Docker images as container specific images); create an image blockchain identifier (BCID) based on the code and information corresponding to the user device ( Gutierrez in para. [0222, 0256] discloses the SKL engine with Code Package processing the identifier of respective event in a blockchain system); encrypt the image BCID using a homomorphic encryption process ( Gutierrez , as noted above in para. [0207] discloses usage of symmetric (homomorphic) algorithm for data encryption including Docker images per Code Package); generate metadata corresponding to the encrypted image BCID ( Gutierrez in para. [0235, 0323] discloses the SKL engine processing metadata comprising identifiers of specified encoded entities); and record the metadata on a blockchain ( Gutierrez in para. [0399] discloses the SKL library comprising information including metadata stored in a blockchain database), wherein the recording enhances security of access to the encrypted docker image ( Gutierrez in para. [0399] discloses access to various artifacts, i.e., images, docker images, etc., by using the SKL library resources) by providing a layer of authentication using the encrypted image BCID and the corresponding metadata ( Gutierrez in para. [0295, 0328] discloses authentication protocols used within secure SKL schema validation including managing metadata [0382]; Gutierrez in para. [0567] discloses Standard Syncer which uses a layered method). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for generation and processing metadata files in a blockchain system including data block and image file identifiers implementing encryption in order to improve security in the system. Pattabhi as modified does not explicitly disclose: modification of the docker image by adding a CVE list. However, Jung , discloses: incorporate the CVE list into the docker image by adding a file containing the CVE list to the docker image; ( Jung , in para. [0018] discloses vulnerability inspection device performing docker file analysis followed by mapping-in the respective modifications to the file, i.e., adding relevant information to the image file). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez , in view of teaching of Jung because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez for teaching of Jung for modification of the docker image file based on the results of the file vulnerability inspection to improve security in the system. As per claim 2 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to: receive, from the user device, a first request to access the docker image ( Gutierrez in para. [0399] discloses access to various artifacts, i.e., images, docker images, etc., by using the SKL library resources); authenticate the user device by: matching the encrypted image BCID with the corresponding metadata on the blockchain ( Gutierrez in para. [0295, 0328] discloses authentication protocols used within secure SKL schema validation [0294]. Gutierrez in para. [0202] discloses comparing identifiers for a match with data stored in a Data-Store. Gutierrez in para. [0398] discloses the SKL library comprising information including metadata stored in a blockchain database. Gutierrez in para. [0235, 0323] discloses the SKL engine processing metadata comprising identifiers of specified encoded entities); and identifying whether the user device has permission to access the encrypted docker image based on the matching ( Gutierrez in para. [0398] discloses access to various artifacts, i.e., images, encrypted docker images [0207], etc., by using the SKL library resources; Gutierrez in para. [0607] discloses analytics server 3810 verifying users and executing an access directory protocol, LDAP, i.e., verifying permissions to access the data base); decrypt the encrypted image BCID based on authenticating the user device ( Gutierrez , in para. [0207] discloses usage of symmetric (homomorphic) algorithm for data encryption and decryption including Docker images per execution of Code Package [0256]); identify the code using the decrypted image BCID ( Gutierrez in para. [0186-0199] discloses Verb module managing various packages and codes); send a second request to the docker image storage system, wherein the second request includes the code and commands, that when executed by the docker image storage system, cause the docker image storage system to send the encrypted docker image that corresponds to the code ( Gutierrez in para. [0198-0199] discloses communication of Verb module with different servers and databases, image files management including execution of a container, i.e., a runnable instance of a Docker image); receive, from the docker image storage system, the encrypted docker image that corresponds to the code ( Gutierrez in para. [0222, 0224] discloses the Code Package included in a Standard Knowledge Language, SKL, engine communicating with the memory and running Docker images as container specific images); decrypt the encrypted docker image; and send, to the user device, the decrypted docker image ( Gutierrez , in para. [0207] discloses usage of symmetric (homomorphic) algorithm for data encryption and decryption including Docker images per execution of Code Package [0256]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for generation and processing metadata files in a blockchain system including data block and image file identifiers implementing encryption in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 3 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to: [ compare ] a total number of vulnerabilities ( Pattabhi , in para [0022] discloses scanning procedure of a docker images to detect all vulnerabilities) in the CVE list ( Madiraju , in para [0003, 0079] discloses creation and usage of common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report generated for docker images and containers). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi , in view of teaching of Madiraju because they both disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi for teaching of Madiraju for generation and processing the common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report in order to improve security in the system. Pattabhi as modified does not explicitly disclose: comparing all vulnerabilities detected by a scan to a predefined threshold or criteria. However, Gutierrez discloses: compare [a total number of vulnerabilities] to a threshold; and based on the total number of vulnerabilities not exceeding the threshold, ( Gutierrez in para. [0294] discloses a scanning procedure of databases in a blockchain system and a data comparison in [0202] according to predefined criteria for security needs [0304], e.g., with predefined limitations, criteria, for total number of detected events). encrypt the docker image ( Gutierrez , in para. [0207] discloses usage of symmetric (homomorphic) algorithm for data encryption and decryption including Docker images per execution of Code Package [0256]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for generation and processing metadata files in a blockchain system including data block and image file identifiers implementing encryption in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 4 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to: [ compare a total number of vulnerabilities ] in the CVE list ( Madiraju , in para [0003, 0079] discloses creation and usage of common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report generated for docker images and containers) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi , in view of teaching of Madiraju because they both disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi for teaching of Madiraju for generation and processing the common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVE) report in order to improve security in the system. Pattabhi as modified does not explicitly disclose: comparing all vulnerabilities detected by a scan of a data file to a predefined threshold or criteria. compare a total number of vulnerabilities [ in the CVE list ] to a threshold; and based on the total number of vulnerabilities meeting or exceeding the threshold, send a notification to the user device ( Gutierrez in para. [0294] discloses a scanning procedure of databases in a blockchain system and a data comparison in [0202] according to predefined criteria for security needs [0304], e.g., with predefined limitations for total number of detected events) and based on the total number of vulnerabilities meeting or exceeding the threshold, send a notification to the user device ( Gutierrez in para. [0597] and in Fig. 54 discloses a module SKApp that manages notifications between various different sources). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of data encryption and a comparative analysis of predefined data files based on a data base scanning in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 5 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the symmetric encryption process comprises advanced encryption standard (AES) 256. ( Gutierrez in para. [0294] discloses implementation of various known computing algorithms, e.g., a standard algorithm AES 256, see e.g., J. Nechvatal et al. Report on the Development of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). J. Res. NIST, 2001, pp.511-577). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of standard data encryption algorithms in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 6 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the code is an alphanumeric sequence that identifies a location at the docker image storage system where the encrypted docker image is stored ( Gutierrez in para. [0609] discloses a metadata file that includes storage location of a data file). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of metadata files which include data location in storage in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 7 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the image BCID is generated using a Fowler-Noll-Vo (FNV) hash algorithm. ( Gutierrez in para. [0294] discloses implementation of various known computing algorithms, e.g., a standard Fowler-Noll-Vo (FNV) hash algorithm, see e.g., W. Yao et al. A FNV Based IPv6 Address Autoconfiguration Scheme for Power IoT Sensory Device. In 22d Int. Conf. Net. Syst. AI. 2022, p. 216.). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of standard data hash algorithms in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 8 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the homomorphic encryption process comprises Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) encryption ( Gutierrez in para. [0294] discloses implementation of various known computing algorithms, e.g., a standard Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) encryption algorithm). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of standard data encryption algorithms in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 9 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the metadata is recorded on the blockchain network using a smart contract, wherein the smart contract defines one or more rules that identify permissioned devices that can access the docker image ( Gutierrez in para. [0221] discloses implementation of smart contracts in conjunction with the SKL engine. Gutierrez in para. [0235, 0323] discloses the SKL engine processing metadata comprising identifiers of specified encoded entities. Gutierrez discloses in para. [0607, 0621] analytics server 3810 verifying users and executing an access directory protocol, LDAP, i.e., verifying permissions to access the data base processing and granting access permissions). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of analytics servers for processing access permissions in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 10 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the user device updates permissioned devices that can access the docker image ( Gutierrez discloses in para. [0621, 0639] analytics server functions to monitor and update access permission). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for implementation of analytics servers for processing access permissions in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 11 , claim 11 encompasses same or similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 1. As per claim 12 , claim 12 encompasses same or similar scope as claim 2. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 2. As per claims 13 – 18 , claims 13 – 18 encompass same or similar scope as claims 5 – 10, respectively. Therefore, claims 13 – 18 are rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 5 – 10. As per claim 19 , claim 19 encompasses same or similar scope as claim 4. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 4. As per claim 20 , claim 20 encompasses same or similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 1. As per claim 21 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein generating the CVE list comprises ranking the one or more vulnerabilities based on seriousness by scoring each vulnerability on a 1- 5 point scale, wherein a lower number represents a vulnerability of lower concern and a higher number represents a vulnerability of higher concern. ( Jung , in para. [0051] disclosed a vulnerability inspection device 100 producing a docker file 10 representing the standardized list, i.e., a score, based on the security vulnerability inspection according to predefined standards in accordance to CVE). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez , in view of teaching of Jung because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez for teaching of Jung for modification of the docker image file based on the results of the file vulnerability inspection to improve security in the system. As per claim 22 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 21, wherein incorporating the CVE list into the docker image comprises adding only vulnerabilities having a score above a predetermined score to the file containing the CVE list ( Jung , in para. [0110] disclosed a docker file 10 comprising standardized vulnerability list, i.e., score, incorporated into a docker image 20 through reversing the file). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez , in view of teaching of Jung because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez for teaching of Jung for modification of the docker image file based on the results of the file vulnerability inspection to improve security in the system. As per claim 23 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 22, wherein the predetermined score is 3 ( Jung , in para. [0051] disclosed a vulnerability inspection device 100 producing a docker file 10 representing the standardized list, i.e., a score, based on the security vulnerability inspection according to predefined standards in accordance to CVE, that may include any predefined numbers). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez , in view of teaching of Jung because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju-Gutierrez for teaching of Jung for modification of the docker image file based on the results of the file vulnerability inspection to improve security in the system. As per claim 24 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the docker image storage system comprises an interplanetary file system (IPFS) or a JFrog artifactory. ( Gutierrez, in para. [442] discloses data storage in IPFS, the Inter Planetary File System). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for usage of the Inter Planetary File System for data storage in order to improve capabilities in the system. As per claim 25 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein creating the image BCID comprises hashing together the code and information about the docker image, wherein the information about the docker image comprises a size of the docker image ( Gutierrez in para. [0222, 0256] discloses the SKL engine with Code Package processing the identifier of respective event in a blockchain system, i.e., creation an image blockchain identifier (BCID)). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju , in view of teaching of Gutierrez because they all disclose data processing including docker image files in a network. The motivation to combine would be to modify Pattabhi-Madiraju for teaching of Gutierrez for generation and processing metadata files in a blockchain system including data block and image file identifiers implementing encryption in order to improve security in the system. As per claim 26 Pattabhi as modified discloses: The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: based on multiple attempts to access the docker image that are not authenticated, preventing any device from attempting to access the docker image for a period of time ( Pattabhi, in para. [0042, 0043] discloses a sand box created as a cloud virtual private cloud, VPC, to control access to a docker image, i.e., allowing or preventing access based on the predetermined conditions in the sand box). Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Singh US_20250103721 . 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 extension fee 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 VLADIMIR IVANOVICH GAVRILENKO whose telephone number is (313) 446-6530. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30 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, Lynn Feild can be reached on (571) 272-2092. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Vladimir I. Gavrilenko/Examiner, Art Unit 2431 /LYNN D FEILD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 2 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 3 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 4 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 5 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 6 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 7 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 8 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 9 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 10 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 11 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 12 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 13 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 14 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 15 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 16 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 17 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 18 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 19 Art Unit: 2431 Application/Control Number: 18/645,520 Page 20 Art Unit: 2431
Prosecution Insights