CTFR 18/817,728 CTFR 68873 DETAILED ACTION Response to Arguments 07-38-01 AIA Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1 and 2 of the remarks , filed on April 02, 2026 , with respect to the objections to the abstract have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the abstract has been withdrawn. 07-38-01 AIA Applicant’s arguments, see page 2 of the remarks , filed on April 02, 2026 , with respect to the objections to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn. 07-38-01 AIA Applicant’s arguments, see page 2 of the remarks , filed on April 02, 2026 , with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 21-34 and 36-39 has been withdrawn. 07-38-01 AIA Applicant’s arguments, see page 2 of the remarks , filed on April 02, 2026 , with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 27-29, 31, 33, and 34 has been withdrawn. 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed on April 02, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the rejections of claims 36-39 rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102 and the rejections of claims 20-23 and 30-35 rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103, Applicant’s arguments on pages 2-4 of the remarks have been fully considered by the examiner. See the detail response to the amended claims below . 06-37 AIA The drawings were received on April 02, 2026 . These drawings are acceptable by the examiner . Specification 06-16 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “control means” should be avoided. 07-44 AIA The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The specification fails to provide to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter that “the difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency” recited in the amendments to each of claims 20, 35, and 36 . Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 20-39 are objected to because of the following informalities: 20. (Proposed Amendment) An apparatus comprising: a first signal path for a first channel operating at a first frequency within a first frequency range; a second signal path for a second channel operating at a second frequency within a second frequency range; at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to control frequency-conversion in the second signal path between the second frequency and the first frequency, wherein a magnitude of frequency-conversion is controlled to change in dependence upon a difference between the second frequency and the first frequency; and [[the]] a difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency. 25. (Proposed Amendment) The apparatus as claimed in claim 24, wherein the shared frequency synthesizer is configured to provide a frequency-conversion at the first signal path between the first frequency and a reference frequency and a frequency-conversion at the second signal path between the first second frequency and the reference frequency. 27. (Proposed Amendment) The apparatus as claimed in claim 20, wherein the first signal path comprises a first frequency converter for frequency conversion between the first frequency and a reference frequency; the second signal path comprises a second frequency converter for frequency conversion between the second frequency and the first frequency and a third frequency converter for frequency conversion between the first frequency and the reference frequency; the instructions stored in the at least one memory, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to control the second frequency converter; and the instructions stored in the at least one memory, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to commonly and simultaneously control both the first frequency converter and the third frequency converter to convert between the first frequency and the reference frequency. 32. (Proposed Amendment) The [[An]] apparatus as claimed in claim 20, wherein at least one of: the first signal path is configured for transfer of at least one of a plurality of component carriers that [[are]] is combined for higher bandwidth information transfer; the second signal path is configured for transfer of at least one of a plurality of component carriers that [[are]] is combined for higher bandwidth information transfer; or the first signal path and the second signal path are configured for transfer of multiple component carriers that are combined for higher bandwidth information transfer. 35. (Proposed Amendment) A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions that, when executed by an apparatus a processor , cause [[the]] an apparatus to perform at least the following: control frequency conversion in a first signal path for a first channel operating at a first frequency within a first frequency range and a second signal path for a second channel operating at a second frequency within a second frequency range; wherein a magnitude of frequency-conversion is controlled to change in dependence upon a difference between the second frequency and the first frequency; and [[the]] a difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency. 36. (Proposed Amendment) A method comprising: controlling frequency-conversion, in a second signal path for a second channel operating at a second radio frequency within a second frequency range, between the second radio frequency and a first radio frequency [[;]] , wherein the first radio frequency is a radio frequency at which a different signal path for a different channel operates, the first radio frequency being within a first frequency range [[;]] , wherein a magnitude of the frequency-conversion is controlled to change in dependence upon a difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency; and the difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency. Applicant note the word “An” amended in line 1 of claim 32 was not recited in the original claim. Claims 21-24, 26, 28-31, 33, and 34 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 20, therefore they are also objected. Claims 37-39 all depend claim 36, therefore they are also objected . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-34-01 Claims 20-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Last two lines of both claims 20 and 35, the phrases “the first radio frequency” and “the second radio frequency” lack antecedent basis. Claim 21 depends from claim 20, the same phrase “a difference between the second frequency and the first frequency” appears already recited in lines 10-11 of claim 20. Clarification is required to clarify the difference. Claims 22-34 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 20, therefore they are also rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 36-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2011/0075593 A1), hereinafter “Chen” . Chen illustrates a wireless communication transceiver in Figure 5 supporting a time division duplexing mode and/or a frequency division duplexing mode. The wireless communication transceiver comprising: an antenna 110; a duplexer 111; a path switch 112; a control unit 114; a first band bi-directional band-pass filter 117-1; a second band bi-directional band-pass filter 117-2; a configuration switch 115; a down converter 118-1; an up converter 118-2, a frequency switch 116; a first oscillating unit 119-1; and a second oscillating unit 119-2. The wireless communication transceiver shown in Figures 6 and 7 is operating in a dual band time division duplexing mode. The wireless communication transceiver shown in Figures 10 and 11 is operating in a single band time division duplexing mode. The wireless communication transceiver shown in Figure 13 is operating in a frequency division duplexing mode. Regarding claim 36, as shown in one or more of the alternative wireless communication transceivers, for example, as shown in Figure 5 related to the first band of the Tx and Rx paths and the second band of the Tx and Rx paths shown in one or more of Figures 1-3, 8, 9, and 12, the control unit 114 is capable of operating the functions of: controlling frequency-conversion (of the down converter 118-1 and/or the up converter 118-2), in a second signal path (Tx or Rx path) for a second channel operating at a second radio frequency (from or to the antenna 110) within a second frequency range (first or second band which is inherently a specific frequency range within the electromagnetic spectrum), between the second radio frequency and a first radio frequency (Rx or Tx path), wherein the first radio frequency is the radio frequency at which a different signal path for a different channel operates, the first radio frequency being within a first frequency range (second or first band which is inherently a specific frequency range within the electromagnetic spectrum), wherein a magnitude of the frequency-conversion is controlled to change in dependence upon a difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency (based on the control of the configuration switch 115 controlled by the control unit 114). Regarding the amendment to the claim that “the difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency”, it is entirely inherent and universally well-known in the art of RF engineering, physics, and signal processing that the frequency difference between two signals is defined by the absolute value of the first subtracted from the second for at least the following reasons: 1. Difference Represents Magnitude, Not Direction In signal processing, the “difference” between two signals (e.g., in beat frequency calculations, heterodyning, or mixing) represents the physical rate of oscillation, modulation, or cyclic overlap. Frequencies are scalar quantities, meaning they cannot have “negative” values. A difference frequency must always be a positive magnitude, it defines exactly how many times per second two waves drift in and out of phase, or the specific Hz spacing between two channels. 2. Independent of which Frequency is Greater In a standard superheterodyne receiver or when calculating frequency separation, engineers mix an incoming Radio Frequency (RF) with a Local Oscillator (LO) to generate an Intermediate Frequency (IF). Because f LO can be tuned either higher or lower than f RF , the raw mathematical subtraction (f RF - f LO ) or (f LO - f RF ) will yield either a positive or negative result. Because receivers inherently filter out the mathematical sign to isolate the positive beat frequency, applying the absolute value is a fundamental mathematical reality of how RF hardware functions. Also see the two newly cited prior art references. Regarding claim 37, as applied to claim 36, wherein the method comprises controlling the frequency-conversion in the second radio signal path between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency, wherein a magnitude of the frequency-conversion is controlled to change with changes in magnitude of the second radio frequency within the second frequency range and is controlled to match a difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency. The control unit 114 controlling the switching of the configuration switch 115 inherently controls its output amplitude (voltage/power) by adjusting the duty cycle or switching pattern, effectively managing how much energy is delivered and also effect signal strength, making amplitude control essential for stable output power in both scenarios. Regarding claim 38, as applied to claim 36, wherein the method comprises controlling the frequency-conversion in the second signal path between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency, the method further comprises controlling an intermediate frequency (of the down converter 118-1 and/or the up converter 118-2) in the second signal path to match the first radio frequency. Regarding claim 39, as applied to claim 36, wherein the method comprises controlling the frequency-conversion for the second channel between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency in dependence upon received downlink control information (of the down converter 118-1) defining at least one of the following: the second radio frequency or the first radio frequency which inherently applies to either uplink or downlink channels . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 20-23 and 30-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Nielsen et al. (US 2017/0187475 A1), hereinafter “Nielsen” . Regarding claim 20, as described above related to the method claim 36, Chen illustrates an apparatus (the wireless communication transceiver in Figure 5) comprising: a first signal path (Tx or Rx path) for a first channel operating at a first frequency (the RF frequency from the antenna 110 or the carrier frequency from the first or second oscillation unit 119-1 or 119-2) within a first frequency range (first or second band); a second signal path (Rx or Tx path) for a second channel operating at a second frequency (the RF frequency from the antenna 110 or the carrier frequency from the first or second oscillation unit 119-1 or 119-2) within a second frequency range (second or first band); at least one processor (control unit 114); and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wireless communication transceiver at least to control frequency-conversion (of the down converter 118-1 and/or the up converter 118-2) in the second signal path between the second frequency and the first frequency, wherein a magnitude of frequency-conversion is controlled to change in dependence upon a difference between the second frequency and the first frequency. Although Chen does not explicitly show or teach that the wireless communication transceiver comprises at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the control unit, cause the wireless communication transceiver to perform the controlling functions, it appears not new in the wireless communications art, such as shown in Figure 5 of Nielsen’s communication system to comprises a processor 550, which may include one or more processing elements (e.g., CPUs) and memory (including volatile and/or nonvolatile memory). See paragraph [0068]. Regarding the amendment to the claim that “the difference between the second radio frequency and the first radio frequency is defined by an absolute value of the first radio frequency subtracted from the second radio frequency”, it is entirely inherent and universally well-known in the art of RF engineering, physics, and signal processing that the frequency difference between two signals is defined by the absolute value of the first subtracted from the second for the same reasons described in claim 36 above. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art as taught by Nielsen to modify Chen’s control unit to include a processor and a memory to perform the controlling operation of the stored instructions stored in the memory in order to enable the processor to execute specific tasks and access different program segments. This allows the processor to make decisions, repeat operations, or stop execution as needed. These instructions are capable of branching to different program segments, allowing for more complex and configurable control of the uplink and downlink converters. Regarding claims 21 and 22, the claim features of claims 21 and 22 are similar to the claim features recited in the method claims 37 and 38 for the similar reasons described above. Regarding claim 23, as shown in Chen’s Figure 5, the wireless communication transceiver further comprising circuitry (such as the down converter 118-1, the up converter 118-2, the frequency switch 116, the first oscillating unit 119-1, and the second oscillating unit 119-2) associated with the first signal path and the second signal path and configured for the first frequency range. Regarding claim 30, as shown in Chen’s Figure 5, wherein the first channel is a first physical channel and the first frequency is a radio frequency of the first physical channel (from or to the antenna 110) and the second channel is a second physical channel and the second frequency is a radio frequency of the second physical channel (to or from the antenna 110). Regarding claim 31, the claim features of claim 31 are similar to the claim features recited in the method claim 39 for the similar reasons described above. Regarding claim 32, as shown in Chen’s Figure 5, wherein the first or second signal path is configured for transfer of at least one of a plurality of component carriers that are combined for higher bandwidth information transfer. Regarding claim 33, such as shown in Chen’s Figure 1, the duplexer 111 is configured to split a received physical channel (Rx) into multiple parallel second channels (first and second band Rx paths 113-2 and 113-4) of contiguous frequency ranges. Regarding claim 34, although Chen fails to show or teach that the wireless communication transceiver shown in Figure is configured as user equipment, the examiner is taking the official notice that it is exceptionally well known and standard practice in the art to implement a wireless communication transceiver in a user equipment (UE). A transceiver (transmitter-receiver combined) is a fundamental and essential component for any device designed for two-way wireless communication. User equipment, which includes devices like mobile phones, smartphones, tablets, laptops, and various IoT devices, by definition relies on this capability to connect to wireless networks (e.g., cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth). Regarding the independent claim 35, the claim features of claim 35 are similar to the claim features of the apparatus claim 20 for the same reasons described in claim 20 above . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 24-25 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen and Nielsen as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Freiman et al. (US 10,630,336 B1), hereinafter “Freiman” . Regarding claim 24, as applied to claim 20, Chen fails to show or teach that The first and second oscillating units 119-1 and 119-2 are a shared frequency synthesizer that provides an output frequency signal to the first signal path and the second signal path. Freiman illustrates a communication system in Figure 2-1 comprising a shared frequency synthesizer, such as the PLL configured to share the carrier frequencies to the mixers 208 and also the mixers 210a, 210b, 242, and 244. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art as taught by Freiman to modify Chen’s oscillating units with a single synthesizer circuit in order to provide carrier frequencies to both the up and down converters for cost savings on the oscillating units. Regarding claim 25, as applied to claim 24, inherently, the shared frequency synthesizer is configured to provide a frequency-conversion at the first signal path between the first frequency and a reference frequency and a frequency-conversion at the second signal path between the first frequency and the reference frequency. Regarding claim 28, as applied to claim 20, Chen also fails to show or teach that the wireless communication transceiver further comprising processing circuitry configured for applying the same analog-digital conversion process to the first channel and the second channel. Freiman illustrates the communication system in Figure 2-1 further comprising an ADC 202 configured for applying the same analog-digital conversion process to the first channel and the second channel. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art as taught by Freiman to implement Chen’s wireless communication transceiver to include an ADC in order to convert analog signal into digital signals for the up and down conversion of the digital signals. Regarding claim 29, as applied to claim 28, the examiner is taking the official notice that Chen’s control unit 114 is capable of including a first processing circuitry controlled to apply the analog-digital conversion process the first channel and a second processing circuitry configured to apply simultaneously the analog-digital conversion process to the second channel as taught by Freiman in order to increase overall throughput, improve power efficiency (by using specialized cores), enhanced reliability, and lower communication latency, enabling complex tasks to run faster by splitting workloads or keeping components separate but close. This design allows for running more applications simultaneously, dedicating cores to specific tasks (e.g., one for network, one for apps), and faster data movement, crucial for modern computing . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen and Nielsen in view of Freiman , as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Gudem et al. (US 2011/0300914 A1), hereinafter “Gudem” . Regarding claim 26, as applied to claim 24, Freiman teaches to use shared frequency synthesizer, such as PLL circuit, but fails to show or teach that the shared frequency synthesizer is a phase-locked loop (PLL) synthesizer comprising a local oscillator and a programmable phase-locked loop for providing the output frequency signal, and the local oscillator for providing an input to the programmable phase-locked loop. Gudem et al. illusteates a transceiver circuit in Figure 3 illustrates a frequency synthesizer, such as the Tx or Rx local oscillator 23 or 18 comprises a local oscillator 40 or 50 and a PLL 39 or 49, but not a programmable PLL. However, the examiner is taking the official notice that by using a programmable PLL instead of a regular PLL is not new in the art. The main advantage of a programmable phase-locked loop (PLL) is its flexibility to generate a wide range of frequencies and adapt its operating characteristics on the fly, as opposed to a regular (fixed-frequency) PLL which is limited to a single frequency or a very narrow range. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art as taught by Freiman and Gudem to implement Chen’s wireless communication transceiver to modify the oscillating units with a shared frequency synthesizer to include a local oscillator and a programmable PLL in order to generate a wide range of frequencies and adapt its operating characteristics on the fly to improve the operations of the up and down conversion of the carrier frequencies . Allowable Subject Matter Claim 27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection(s) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Humbersot (US 2006/0061685 A1) relates to a receiver circuit in FIG. 2A comprising: two converters ADC in parallel, one on each reception channel, wherein spectra issuing from the two distinct channels are recombined as a single spectrum by means of a partial addition of the two spectra. This partial addition is carried out by the following means. On one of the two channels, here channel A, high-pass filtering means HPF filter the signal received in a first frequency band around the noise frequency in 1/f, here for example the zero frequency (DC). On the other channel, here channel B, shifting means, represented by a mixer, shift the spectrum of the signal received by the difference between the first and second reception frequencies. At the output of the adder, the normal digital processing of the receiver continues with the demodulation DEMOD, the equalization EQUAL and the channel and source decoding, not shown in the figure. The role of the equalizer EQUAL is to correct downstream any degradations in the signal due to imperfections introduced by the preceding processing, in particular the imperfect complementarity of the filters HPF and LPF, the possible difference in gain between the two channels or the imperfection of the control of the frequency shift. JANSEN et al. (US 2022/0205775 A1) relates to an interferometer system 100 in FIG. 4 comprising: optical systems 108 associated with each of the fixed frequency laser source 101 and the tunable laser source 107 . The optical systems 108 are each constructed to split the respective radiation beam into a first beam which is guided along a first optical path and a second beam which is guided along a second optical path. In each optical system 108 , a first optical frequency shift device 108 a is provided in the first optical path and a second optical frequency shift device 108 b is provided in the second optical path in order to create a frequency difference between a first frequency of the first beam and a second frequency of the second beam. The first optical frequency shift device 108 a and the second optical frequency shift device 108 b are for example acousto-optical modulator units that effectively create a frequency difference of for example 4 MHz between the first frequency of the first beam and the second frequency of the second beam. Other devices to create a frequency difference between the first beam and the second beam may also be applied. It is also possible that only in the first optical path or in the second optical path a frequency shift device is arranged to create the desired frequency difference between the first frequency of the first beam and the second frequency of the second beam. The first beam and the second beam originating from the fixed frequency laser source 101 are recombined in the optical system 108 in a recombined radiation with a fixed light frequency. Correspondingly, the first beam and the second beam originating from the tunable laser source 107 are recombined in the optical system 108 in a recombined radiation with a tunable light frequency. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Young T. Tse whose telephone number is (571)272-3051. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:30am-7pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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. /Young T. Tse/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 2 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 3 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 4 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 5 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 6 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 7 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 8 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 9 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 10 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 11 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 12 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 13 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 14 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 15 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 16 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 17 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 18 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 19 Art Unit: 2632 Application/Control Number: 18/817,728 Page 20 Art Unit: 2632
Prosecution Insights