DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-25 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.
Claim 1 recites “optionally an adhesion layer disposed between the conductive current collector layer and the active layer.” Accordingly, it is unclear as to whether the adhesion layer is a required part of the invention. Appropriate correction is required. No new matter may be entered. Claim 4 suffers from analogous problems.
Claim 5 recites “and optionally a salt or/and a solvent.” Accordingly, it is unclear as to whether the salt and/or solvent are a required part of the invention. Appropriate correction is required. No new matter may be entered.
Further, each of claims 16 and 19-25 recite a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) and are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is a required feature of the claims.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 11-13, 15, 17, and 19-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,996.
With respect to claim 1, claims 1-28 of the ‘996 patent recite an energy storage apparatus suitable for mounting on a printed circuit board using a solder reflow process (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 45-47), the apparatus comprising: a sealed housing body comprising a positive internal contact and a negative internal contact each disposed within the housing body and each respectively in electrical communication with a positive external contact and a negative external contact, each of the external contacts providing electrical communication to the exterior of the housing body (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 48-54); an electric double-layer capacitor (EDLC) energy storage cell disposed within a cavity in the housing body and comprising a stack of alternating electrode layers and electrically insulating separator layers (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 55-58); an electrolyte disposed within the cavity in the housing body and wetting the electrode layers (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 59-60); a positive lead electrically connecting a first group of one or more of the electrode layers to the positive internal contact (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 61-63); and a negative lead electrically connecting a second group of one or more of the electrode layers to the negative internal contact (see claim 1, col. 22, lines 64-66); wherein each of the electrode layers comprises: a conductive current collector layer (see claim 2); and an active layer comprising an energy storage media substantially free of binding agents (see claim 1, col. 22, line 66-col. 23, line 5) and disposed over the conductive current collector layer (see claim 2); and optionally an adhesion layer disposed between the conductive current collector layer and the active layer (this element is not required by the claims); wherein at least one electrode layer comprises a double-sided electrode layer (see claim 2) comprising: a conductive current collector layer (see claim 2); and an active layer comprising an energy storage media substantially free of binding agents and disposed over opposing surfaces of the conductive current collector layer (see claim 2); and optionally an adhesion layer disposed between the conductive current collector layer and the active layer (this element is not required by the claim); and wherein the energy storage media comprises a network of carbon nanotubes defining void spaces, wherein a carbonaceous material is located in the void spaces and bound by the network of carbon nanotubes (see claim 1, col. 22, line 66-col. 23, line 5).
With respect to claim 4, claims 1-28 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite that the optional adhesion layer comprises carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, metallic nanowires, or ceramic nanofibers, or any combination thereof. Since this layer is considered optional, there is no requirement that claims 1-28 of the ‘996 patent actually disclose this feature.
With respect to claim 11, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite that the housing body is hermetically sealed.
However, claim 16 recites that the housing body is hermetically sealed. Such an arrangement prevents the incursion of impurities to the energy storage apparatus.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify claims 1 and 2, to include the hermetic sealing of claim 16, in order to prevent the incursion of impurities to the energy storage apparatus.
With respect to claim 12, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite each of the electrode layers comprises a conductive tab connected to the positive lead or the negative lead.
However, claim 4 recites that each of the electrode layers comprises a conductive tab connected to the positive lead or the negative lead. Such an arrangement provides connections to external devices.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as recited in claim 4, in order to provide connections to external devices.
With respect to claim 13, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite that surfaces of the energy storage cell in physical contact with the housing body consist of electrically insulating material.
However, claim 3 recites that that surfaces of the energy storage cell in physical contact with the housing body consist of electrically insulating material. Such an arrangement prevents short-circuiting of the energy storage cell.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as recited in claim 3, in order to prevent short-circuiting of the energy storage cell.
With respect to claim 15, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite that a corrosion prevention feature located proximal to one of the internal contacts and configured to limit electrochemical reaction between the internal contact and the electrolyte during operation of the apparatus.
However, claim 5 recites a corrosion prevention feature located proximal to one of the internal contacts and configured to limit electrochemical reaction between the internal contact and the electrolyte during operation of the apparatus. Such an arrangement limits electrochemical reaction between the internal contact and the electrolyte during operation of the apparatus.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as recited in claim 5, limits electrochemical reaction between the internal contact and the electrolyte during operation of the apparatus.
With respect to claim 17, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite that the energy storage cell provides back-up power to at least one additional element mounted onto the circuit board. The limitation of claim 17 is considered to be an intended use of the structure recited in claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent which does not further limit the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent, and which is not granted patentable weight.
With respect to claim 19, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite an operating voltage of at least 2.0 V, 2.5 V or 3.0 V. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including operating voltage. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 20, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite a capacitance of at least 300 mF, 400 mF or 500 mF. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including capacitance. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 21, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite an energy density of at least 4.0 J/cc, 4.5 J/cc or 5.0 J/cc. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including energy density. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 22, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite a peak power density of at least 15 W/cc, 20 W/cc or 22 W/cc. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including power density. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 23, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite an equivalent series resistance of 500 mΩ or less, 400 mΩ or less, or 300 mΩ or less. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including ESR. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 24, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite an operating temperature of at least 65 °C, 85 °C or 100 °C at an operating voltage of 2.1 V. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including operating temperature at a defined operating voltage. See MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 25, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent is considered to recite an operating lifetime of at least 2,000 hours at an operating voltage of at least 2.0 V and an operating temperature of at least 65 °C, 85 °C or 100 °C while exhibiting a capacitance degradation of less than 30% and an equivalent series resistance increase of less than 100%. Since the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent explicitly recite each of the structural elements of claim 1, they are also considered to implicitly recite any physical properties associated with the structural elements, including operating lifetime, capacitance degradation, and ESR. See MPEP 2112.01.
Claims 2, 3, 5-7, 10, 14, and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,996 in view of Signorelli et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2015/0002987).
With respect to claim 2, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 fails to recite that the carbonaceous material of the energy storage media comprises activated carbon, carbon black, jet black, soot, graphite, graphene, carbon nanotubes, buckeyballs, fullerenes, carbon fibers, carbon cloth, nanohorns, nano-onions, rayon, or aerogel, or any combination thereof.
Signorelli, on the other hand, teaches that the carbonaceous material of the energy storage media comprises activated carbon, carbon black, jet black, soot, graphite, graphene, carbon nanotubes, buckeyballs, fullerenes, carbon fibers, carbon cloth, nanohorns, nano-onions, rayon, or aerogel, or any combination thereof. See paragraphs [0065] and [0069]. Such an arrangement provides robust energy storage. See paragraph [0070].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, in order to provide robust energy storage for the energy storage media.
With respect to claim 3, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 fails to explicitly recite that the energy storage media comprises predominantly or consists essentially of carbonaceous material.
Signorelli, on the other hand, teaches that the energy storage media comprises predominantly or consists essentially of carbonaceous material. See paragraph [0068]. Such an arrangement provides robust energy storage. See paragraph [0070].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, in order to provide robust energy storage for the energy storage media.
With respect to claim 5, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 fails to recite that the electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, and optionally a salt or/and a solvent.
Signorelli, on the other hand, teaches that the electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, and optionally a salt or/and a solvent. See paragraph [0096]. Such an arrangement uses an appropriate electrolyte for a high temperature energy storage device. See paragraph [0096] and the abstract.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, in order to provide an appropriate electrolyte for a high temperature energy storage device.
With respect to claim 6, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent, as modified by Signorelli, recites that: the ionic liquid comprises a cation selected from 1-(3-cyanopropyl)-3-methylimidazolium, 1,2-dimethyl-3-propylimidazolium, 1,3-bis(3-cyanopropyl)imidazolium, 1,3-diethoxyimidazolium, 1-butyl-1-methylpiperidinium, 1-butyl-2,3-dimethylimidazolium, 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium, 1-butyl-4-methylpyridinium, 1-butylpyridinium, 1-decyl-3-methylimidazolium, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium, 3-methyl-1-propylpyridinium, and combinations thereof; or/and the ionic liquid comprises an anion selected from bis(trifluoromethanesulfonate)imide, tris(trifluoromethanesulfonate)methide, dicyanamide, tetrafluoroborate, hexafluorophosphate, trifluoromethanesulfonate, bis(pentafluoroethanesulfonate)imide, thiocyanate, trifluoro(trifluoromethyl)borate, and combinations thereof; or/and the ionic liquid comprises 1-butyl-1-methylpyrrolidinium bis(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)imide, spiro-(1,1’)-bipyrrolidinium tetrafluoroborate salt, or/and tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate salt. See Signorelli, paragraph [0096].
With respect to claim 7, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent, as modified by Signorelli, recites that the electrolyte comprises a solvent selected from acetonitrile, amides, benzonitrile, butyrolactone, cyclic ether, dibutyl carbonate, diethyl carbonate, diethyl ether, dimethoxyethane, dimethyl carbonate, dimethylformamide, dimethylsulfone, dioxane, dioxolane, ethyl formate, ethylene carbonate, ethylmethyl carbonate, lactones, linear ethers, methyl formate, methyl propionate, methyltetrahydrofuran, nitriles, nitrobenzene, nitromethane, N-methylpyrrolidone, propylene carbonate, sulfolane, sulfones, tetrahydrofuran, tetramethylene sulfone, thiophene, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol, polyethylene glycols, carbonic acid esters, γ-butyrolactone, tricyanohexane, butyronitrile, ethylene carbonate, methylene dichloride, and combinations thereof. See Signorelli, paragraph [0097].
With respect to claim 10, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 fails to recite that the cavity of the housing body containing the energy storage cell contains: less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of metallic species impurities; less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of impurities of bromoethane, chloroethane, 1-bromobutane, 1-chlorobutane, 1-methylimidazole, ethyl acetate, and methylene chloride; less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of halide ions; less than about 500 ppm or 200 ppm of halide impurities; or less than about 200 ppm or 100 ppm of moisture; or any combination or all of the above.
Signorelli, on the other hand, teaches that that the cavity of the housing body containing the energy storage cell contains: less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of metallic species impurities; less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of impurities of bromoethane, chloroethane, 1-bromobutane, 1-chlorobutane, 1-methylimidazole, ethyl acetate, and methylene chloride; less than about 1,000 ppm or 500 ppm of halide ions; less than about 500 ppm or 200 ppm of halide impurities; or less than about 200 ppm or 100 ppm of moisture; or any combination or all of the above. See paragraph [0110]. Such an arrangement maintains good chemical hygiene for the energy storage device. See paragraph [0110].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, in order to maintain good chemical hygiene for the energy storage device.
With respect to claim 14, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 fail to recite an electrically insulating envelope barrier enclosing the energy storage cell and the electrolyte and configured to prevent contact of the electrolyte and the energy storage cell with the surfaces of the cavity of the housing body.
Signorelli, on the other hand, teaches an electrically insulating envelope barrier enclosing the energy storage cell and the electrolyte and configured to prevent contact of the electrolyte and the energy storage cell with the surfaces of the cavity of the housing body. See paragraph [0153]. Such an arrangement provides high corrosion resistance. See paragraph [0153].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, in order to provide high corrosion resistance.
With respect to claim 18, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fails to recite a single energy storage cell contained in the sealed housing body.
Signorelli, on the other hand, discloses a single energy storage cell contained in the sealed housing body. See FIG. 12. Such an arrangement is well-known in the art.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Signorelli, as such a structure is well-known in the art.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,996 in view of Yokouchi et al. (US 2015/0213967).
With respect to claim 8, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fails to recite that the electrolyte comprises a gel or a solid-state electrolyte.
Yokouchi, on the other hand, recites that the electrolyte comprises a gel or a solid-state electrolyte. See paragraph [0101]. Such an arrangement results in an energy storage cell that omits a separator. See paragraph [0101].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Yokouchi, in order to omit the need for a separator.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,996 in view of Ashizaki et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. 2010/0188800).
With respect to claim 9, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fail to recite that the stack contains different numbers of positive electrode layers and negative electrode layers configured to promote mass balancing of the stack based on the relative size of cation(s) and anion(s) in the electrolyte.
Ashizaki, on the other hand, teaches that the stack contains different numbers of positive electrode layers and negative electrode layers. See FIG. 3A-3D, noting a different number of layers 2 and 3. Such an arrangement results in the area of negative electrodes being larger than the area of positive electrodes resulting in corrosion reaction occurring in a local part of positive electrodes being suppressed, and hence element 1 can exhibit stable performance. See paragraph [0038].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the embodiment of claims 1 and 2, as modified by Ashizaki, in order to suppress a corrosion reaction in the positive electrode.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,996 in view of Kuriyama (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2008/0094812).
With respect to claim 16, the embodiment of claims 1 and 2 of the ‘996 patent fails to recite that the housing body is a chip configured for surface mounting on a printed circuit board, wherein, when so mounted, the chip extends no more than about 5.0 mm, 4.0 mm or 3.0 mm above the major surface of the printed circuit board.
Kuriyama, on the other hand, teaches that the housing body is a chip configured for surface mounting on the printed circuit board, wherein, when so mounted, the chip extends no more than about 5.0 mm above a major surface of the printed circuit board. See paragraphs [0006] and [0061], noting that the package is about 1-2 mm in height, and further, FIGS. 3 and 4 and paragraph [0072] and [0077], noting that the capacitor is set in a hole of the substrate so that the top of the chip is about 1 mm above the surface and that the terminals T1 and T2 are mounted directly on the surface of the substrate. Such an arrangement minimizes the ESL of the electronic circuit. See paragraph [0077].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of application, to modify claims 1-18 of the ‘775 patent, as taught by Kuriyama, in order to reduce ESL of the circuit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Takahashi et al. (US 2016/0322612) and Zheng (US 2016/0012979) teach electrochemical capacitors, but fail to teach the network of carbon nanotubes defining void spaces, wherein carbonaceous material is located in the void spaces and bound by the network of carbon nanotubes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DION R FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 5:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m..
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, Timothy Dole, can be reached at 571-272-2229. 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.
/DION R. FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights