CTFR 18/666,463 CTFR 73983 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. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed May 18, 2026 has been entered. Prior to the Amendment, claims 1-20 as originally presented were pending in the application. By the Amendment, claims 1, 3-6, 9, 11, 13-16 and 19 are amended, no claims are cancelled or added. Accordingly, claims 1-20 remain pending and ready for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-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 1-5, 7-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Zeine et al. (US Patent No. 10,566,845) in view of Kelly (US Patent Publication No. 2018/0041874) and in further view of Rollet (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0219231) . Regarding claim 1 , Zeine et al . teaches a wireless communication device (Zeine et al ., Fig. 1, any one of #s103a-103n, See, Col. 3, lines 37-47 “clients” or “wireless power receivers,” shown in more detail in Fig. 4) , the wireless communication device comprising at least one processor (Zeine et al ., Fig. 4, #410) configured to: receive an energizing signal (the “wireless power,” See , Zeine et al ., Figs. 8A and 8B, #815; Col. 15, lines 24-25) from an energizer (Zeine et al ., Fig. 1, any one of #s101a-101n, See, Zeine et al ., Col. 3, lines 30-36, the “wireless power transmission system” corresponds to an energizer.), wherein the energizing signal includes one or more energy bursts (See, Zeine et al ., Col 3, line 64 – Col. 4, line 3; and Col. 4, Lines 32-37) ; harvest energy from the energizing signal ( See, Zeine et al ., Fig. 4, #s 450, 455, 440 and 420; and Col. 9, lines 5-8) ; synchronize timing for a timing schedule associated with the wireless communication device ( See, Zeine et al ., Col. 11, line 61-Col. 12, line 14) ; and cause a signal to be transmitted from the wireless communication device according to the timing schedule ( See, Zeine et al ., Fig. 2, which shows “wireless receiver(s)” transmitting (broadcast) a beacon signal. See , also, Col. 6, lines 3-7 and lines 60-63) . Zeine et al., however, fails to explicitly teach that the synchronizing the timing is based on application of a transmit delay associated with the wireless communication device relative to a boundary of an energy burst of the one or more energy bursts, wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays. Kelly teaches that the energizing signal comprises one or more energy bursts ( See , Kelly, Fig. 1B, #s 181A and 181B; and ¶[0034]) ; and that synchronizing the timing is in relation to a boundary of an energy burst of the one or more energy bursts ( See , Kelly, ¶s [0006]; [0035]; and [0036]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration. Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Zeine et al . in view of Kelly, however, fails to explicitly teach synchronizing timing being based on application of a transmit delay associated with the wireless communication device, wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays. Rollet teaches synchronizing timing ( See, e.g. , Fig. 1, showing the scheduling of the data channel time slots for devices #0-#2 synchronized to the beacon signal in each “SuperFrame.” See, also, e.g., ¶s [0017]; and [0038], “pick a considered device…, and calculate, at least for said considered device, a time offset t off,n between a moment when said current beacon is scheduled to be transmitted and the moment when the timeslot dedicated to the considered device is to be allocated”. It should be noted that, according to the teachings of Rollet, the temporal positioning of the time slots for the devices are ordered in relation to the energy burst durations. See, e.g ., ¶s[0033] and [0035]-[0042].) being based on application of a transmit delay (A “time offset t off,n ,” corresponds to the claimed transmit delay. See, e.g., Fig. 1, temporal positioning of the time slots for devices #0-#2; and ¶[0034]) associated with the wireless communication device (Fig. 5, “D#0”–“D#n”) , wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays ( See , ¶[0006], “Slots are allocated to a particular device avoiding any radio collision in the cell; ¶[0034], “dedicated timeslot (i.e. the position of that timeslot in the super-frame”) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of Zeine et al . and Kelly to incorporate the teaching of Rollet in order to implement the well-known collision avoidance by allocation of dedicated time slots in a multi-device wireless communication. ( See, e.g. , Rollet at ¶s[0006] and [0016]-[0017]). Regarding claim 2 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Zeine et al . further teaches that the wireless communication device is a tag device (Fig. 4, #425; See , Col. 5, lines 6-26; Col. 7, lines 39-44; Col. 9, lines 28-33 (the battery 420 can be omitted); Col. 10, lines 34-37; and Col. 18, lines 6-13) . Regarding claim 3 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 4 as discussed below. Zeine et al . further teaches that the at least one processor is configured to receive the beacon signal from an energy wireless communication device (Fig. 7. #s 714 and 715, Col. 5, lines 54-61; and Col. 14, lines 37-42) . Regarding claim 4 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Zeine et al . further teaches the at least one processor is configured to synchronize the timing for the timing schedule further based on a beacon signal ( See , Fig. 7, #s 714; 715; and 717. See, also , Col. 14, lines 37-47) . Regarding claim 5 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Kelly further teaches that the boundary is one of a start boundary or a stop boundary of the energy burst (See, ¶[0035]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration as also contemplated by Ziene et al . Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Regarding claim 7 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Zeine et al. further teaches that, to cause the signal to be transmitted according to the timing schedule, the at least one processor is configured to cause the signal to be transmitted within a time slot of the timing schedule ( See , Col. 5, lines 54-61 and Col. 6, lines 3-6) . Regarding claim 8 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 7 as discussed above. Zeine et al. further teaches that a time of the time slot is based on at least one of an identification (ID) or a characteristic of the wireless communication device ( See , Col. 8, lines 16-33 and Col. 9, lines 57-62) . Regarding claim 9 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Kelly further teaches that, to harvest the energy from the energizing signal, the at least one processor is configured to harvest energy from the one or more energy bursts of the energizing signal ( See , ¶s[0005] and [0035]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration as also contemplated by Ziene et al . Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Regarding claim 10 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Rollet further teaches that the at least one processor is configured to cause the signal to be transmitted when the wireless communication device is sufficiently energized by the energizing signal to perform transmission ( See , ¶[0017], “In order to achieve an efficient bandwidth allocation, timeslots must be allocated only if the device has enough energy to transmit safely one or more data packets;” and ¶s[0069] and [0071], “calculation of a first requested duration of energy burst so that the considered device is able to use the timeslot scheduled at time offset t off,n ,;” emphasis added . See, also , ¶[0118]. It should also be noted that the wireless communication device would necessarily be unable to transmit without sufficient power to do so.) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of Zeine et al . and Kelly to incorporate the teaching of Rollet in order to implement the well-known collision avoidance by allocation of dedicated time slots in a multi-device wireless communication. ( See, e.g. , Rollet at ¶s[0006] and [0016]-[0017]). Regarding claim 11 , Zeine et al . teaches a method of wireless communication (Figs. 2, 7 and 8A) at a wireless communication device (Fig. 1, any one of #103a-103n, See Col. 3, lines 37-47 “clients” or “wireless power receivers,” shown in more detail in Fig. 4) , the method comprising: Receiving, by the wireless communication device, an energizing signal (the “wireless power,” See , Zeine et al ., Figs. 8A and 8B, #815; Col. 15, lines 24-25) from an energizer (Zeine et al ., Fig. 1, any one of #s101a-101n, See, Zeine et al ., Col. 3, lines 30-36, the “wireless power transmission system” corresponds to an energizer.), wherein the energizing signal includes one or more energy bursts (See, Zeine et al ., Col 3, line 64 – Col. 4, line 3; and Col. 4, Lines 32-37) ; harvesting, by the wireless communication device, energy from the energizing signal ( See, Zeine et al ., Fig. 4, #s 450, 455, 440 and 420; and Col. 9, lines 5-8) ; synchronizing by the wireless communication device timing for a timing schedule associated with the wireless communication device ( See, Zeine et al ., Col. 11, line 61-Col. 12, line 14) ; and transmitting, by the wireless communication device, a signal according to the timing schedule ( See, Zeine et al ., Fig. 2, which shows “wireless receiver(s)” transmitting (broadcast) a beacon signal. See , also, Col. 6, lines 3-7 and lines 60-63) . Zeine et al., however, fails to explicitly teach that the synchronizing the timing is based on application of a transmit delay associated with the wireless communication device relative to a boundary of an energy burst of the one or more energy bursts, wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays. Kelly teaches that the energizing signal comprises one or more energy bursts ( See , Kelly, Fig. 1B, #s 181A and 181B; and ¶[0034]) ; and that synchronizing the timing is in relation to a boundary of an energy burst of the one or more energy bursts ( See , Kelly, ¶s [0006]; [0035]; and [0036]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration. Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Zeine et al . in view of Kelly, however, fails to explicitly teach synchronizing timing being based on application of a transmit delay associated with the wireless communication device, wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays. Rollet teaches synchronizing timing ( See, e.g. , Fig. 1, showing the scheduling of the data channel time slots for devices #0-#2 synchronized to the beacon signal in each “SuperFrame.” See, also, e.g., ¶s [0017]; and [0038], “pick a considered device…, and calculate, at least for said considered device, a time offset t off,n between a moment when said current beacon is scheduled to be transmitted and the moment when the timeslot dedicated to the considered device is to be allocated”. It should be noted that, according to the teachings of Rollet, the temporal positioning of the time slots for the devices are ordered in relation to the energy burst durations. See, e.g ., ¶s[0033] and [0035]-[0042].) being based on application of a transmit delay (A “time offset t off,n ,” corresponds to the claimed transmit delay. See, e.g., Fig. 1, temporal positioning of the time slots for devices #0-#2; and ¶[0034]) associated with the wireless communication device (Fig. 5, “D#0”–“D#n”) , wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays ( See , ¶[0006], “Slots are allocated to a particular device avoiding any radio collision in the cell; ¶[0034], “dedicated timeslot (i.e. the position of that timeslot in the super-frame”) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of Zeine et al . and Kelly to incorporate the teaching of Rollet in order to implement the well-known collision avoidance by allocation of dedicated time slots in a multi-device wireless communication. ( See, e.g. , Rollet at ¶s[0006] and [0016]-[0017]). Regarding claim 12 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Zeine et al . further teaches that the wireless communication device is a tag device (Fig. 4, #425; See , Col. 5, lines 6-26; Col. 7, lines 39-44; Col. 9, lines 28-33 (the battery 420 can be omitted); Col. 10, lines 34-37; and Col. 18, lines 6-13) . Regarding claim 13 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 14 as discussed below. Zeine et al . further teaches receiving, by the wireless communication device from an energy wireless communication device, the beacon signal (Fig. 7. #s 714 and 715, Col. 5, lines 54-61; and Col. 14, lines 37-42) . Regarding claim 14 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Zeine et al . further teaches synchronizing the timing for the timing schedule further based on a beacon signal ( See , Fig. 7, #s 714; 715; and 717. See, also , Col. 14, lines 37-47) . Regarding claim 15 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Kelly further teaches that the boundary is one of a start boundary or a stop boundary of the energy burst (See, ¶[0035]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration as also contemplated by Ziene et al . Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Regarding claim 17 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Zeine et al. further teaches transmitting the signal according to the timing schedule comprises transmitting the signal within a time slot of the timing schedule ( See , Col. 5, lines 54-61 and Col. 6, lines 3-6) . Regarding claim 18 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 17 as discussed above. Zeine et al. further teaches that a time of the time slot is based on at least one of an identification (ID) or a characteristic of the wireless communication device ( See , Col. 8, lines 16-33 and Col. 9, lines 57-62) . Regarding claim 19 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Kelly further teaches that harvesting the energy from the energizing signal comprises harvesting energy from the one or more energy bursts of the energizing signal ( See , ¶s[0005] and [0035]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zeine et al . to incorporate the teaching of Kelly to implement the synchronization using the energy signal boundaries in a single antenna configuration as also contemplated by Ziene et al . Doing so would provide the benefit of the reduction in costs and complexity ( See , Kelly at ¶[0002] and Zeine et al . at Col. 18, lines 6-13). Regarding claim 20 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 11 as discussed above. Rollet further teaches transmitting the signal when the wireless communication device is sufficiently energized by the energizing signal to perform transmission ( See , ¶[0017], “In order to achieve an efficient bandwidth allocation, timeslots must be allocated only if the device has enough energy to transmit safely one or more data packets;” and ¶s[0069] and [0071], “calculation of a first requested duration of energy burst so that the considered device is able to use the timeslot scheduled at time offset t off,n ,;” emphasis added . See, also , ¶[0118]. It should also be noted that the wireless communication device would necessarily be unable to transmit without sufficient power to do so.) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined teachings of Zeine et al . and Kelly to incorporate the teaching of Rollet in order to implement the well-known collision avoidance by allocation of dedicated time slots in a multi-device wireless communication. ( See, e.g. , Rollet at ¶s[0006] and [0016]-[0017]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet in even further view of Bluetooth V4.2 1 . Regarding claim 6 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication device comprising all of the recited elements of claim 4 as discussed above. Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet, however, fails to explicitly teach that the beacon signal comprises one or more pulses, and that the at least one processor is configured to synchronize the timing for the timing schedule based on a time of a pulse of the one or more pulses of the beacon signal. Bluetooth V4.2 teaches that the synchronization of the clocks is achieved using the alternating bit pulses in the preamble of the link layer packet (See, e.g., §2.1.1 discussion of the 8 bit preamble) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the beacon pulses as taught by Bluetooth V4.2 in the wireless communication device taught by Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet, as doing so would allow the wireless power receiver clients to communicate using the Bluetooth protocol in compliance with the protocol specification. Regarding claim 16 , Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet teach a wireless communication method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 14 as discussed above. Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet, however, fails to explicitly teach that the beacon signal comprises one or more pulses, and that the at least one processor is configured to synchronize the timing for the timing schedule based on a time of a pulse of the one or more pulses of the beacon signal. Bluetooth V4.2 teaches that the synchronization of the clocks is achieved using the alternating bit pulses in the preamble of the link layer packet (See, e.g., §2.1.1 discussion of the 8 bit preamble) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the beacon pulses as taught by Bluetooth V4.2 in the wireless communication device taught by Zeine et al . in view of Kelly in further view of Rollet, as doing so would allow the wireless power receiver clients to communicate using the Bluetooth protocol in compliance with the protocol specification . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s generalized statement of disagreement with 1) Examiner’s 102 rejections in the previous Office Action ( See Amendment, page 7, “Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 102”); and 2) the characterization of the prior art in the previous Office Action ( See Amendment at page 9) do not provide any specific reasons as to why either the findings of fact or the legal conclusion of anticipation is allegedly in error. The legal decision cited discuss various aspects of an anticipation analysis but the arguments make only generalizations not tied to the facts of the cases. Thus, the remarks in response to the anticipation rejection do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 714.02; see also MPEP §707.07(a). Applicant argues, in a nutshell, that none of the prior art references relied in support of the rejections in the previous Office Action, namely, Zeine et al ., Kelly, Bluetooth V4.2 and He, either alone or in combination, disclose or teach the newly added limitations of claims 1 and 11 as amended, namely, “ "synchroniz[ing] timing for a timing schedule associated with the wireless communication device based on application of a transmit delay associated with the wireless communication device relative to a boundary of an energy burst of the one or more energy bursts, wherein different wireless communication devices are associated with different transmit delays." In light of the new grounds of rejections presented in this Office Action, the above Applicant’s argument is now moot. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KI S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-9141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM - 5:30PM. 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, Moo R Jeong can be reached at (571) 272-9617. 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. /K.S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2418 February 12, 2026 /Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 2 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 3 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 4 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 5 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 6 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 7 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 8 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 9 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 10 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 11 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 12 Art Unit: 2418 Application/Control Number: 18/666,463 Page 13 Art Unit: 2418 1 Bluetooth Core System Package [Low Energy Controller Volume], page 38, §2.1, et seq ., of Vol. 6, Part B of the Specification of the Bluetooth® System, Covered Core Package Version 4.2, published by the Bluetooth SIG on December 2, 2014, which was made of the record in the previous Office Action.
Prosecution Insights