CTNF 19/032,837 CTNF 88145 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. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “ operation part ” in claims 3-4 and 7-8. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-4 and 7-8 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. In Reference to Claim 1 In lines 6-9 recites “wherein, among the plurality of autonomous movable bodies, an autonomous movable body other than the control target performs determination of whether an own movable body of the autonomous movable body is located within a stoppable region, and stops based on a result of the determination” however it is not clear as to the scope required by the recitations since the claim describes the capability of the “autonomous movable body other than the control target” without positively reciting any control signals or recite that the “autonomous movable body other than the control target” is configured to perform the functions in respond to a control signal therefore the claims can be interpreted describing the capability of performing the function of the “body” and not explicitly need to perform the function. The examiner suggests amending the claim to recite specific control signals or control to perform the function. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as merely functional language which the vehicles are capable of performing. In Reference to Claim 2 In lines 3-5 recites “the autonomous movable body ceases further movement to stop, and when the autonomous movable body determines that…” however it is not clear if the “the autonomous movable body” is referring back to “the autonomous movable body other than the control target” or “the autonomous movable body as the control target”. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpret as referring back to “the autonomous movable body other than the control target”. In Reference to Claim 7 In lines 5-10 recites “a transmitter that, based on the operation, transmits a first control signal for controlling an autonomous movable body of the control target to the autonomous movable body of the control target, and transmits a second control signal to an autonomous movable body other than the control target, the second control signal causing the autonomous movable body other than the control target to perform a determination of whether an own movable body thereof is located within a stoppable region, and stop based on a result of the determination” however, it is not clear as to the scope required by the recitations since the claim is recites the “transmitter” functioning like a controller however the controller that makes the decision of the function is not recited and since transmitter is device that just transmits signals therefore the functions recited following the “transmitter” is not clear as to positively required or merely a functional languages as to what transmitter is capable of transmitting. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as merely requiting a transmitter in a control system. In Reference to Claim 8 In lines 5-8 recites “transmitter that, based on the operation, transmits a third control signal to all of the autonomous movable bodies in the group, the third control signal including target information identifying an autonomous movable body of the control target and control information for controlling an autonomous movable body of the control target” however, it is not clear as to the scope required by the recitations since the claim is recites the “transmitter” functioning like a controller however the controller that makes the decision of the function is not recited and since transmitter is device that just transmits signals therefore the functions recited following the “transmitter” is not clear as to positively required or merely a functional languages as to what transmitter is capable of transmitting. For the purposes of treating the claim under prior art, the language is interpreted as merely requiting a transmitter in a control system. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-5 and 7-8 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pub No. US 2021/0232137 A1 to Whitfield et. al. (Whitfield) . In Reference to Claim 1 An autonomous movable body control system comprising: a plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 1 and 4 and paragraph 30, “ The dumper truck 30 comprises a chassis 2 that is movable on wheels 1. The wheels 1 are driven by a drive unit 6 comprising at least one engine. The engine may be an internal combustion engine, e.g., a diesel engine. In an embodiment, the drive unit 6 may be a diesel-electric drive unit. The wheels may be driven by electric motors powered by a generator, the generator in turn driven by the diesel engine ”); and a control device (10) that transmits a control signal for controlling at least one of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) as a control target to each of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-4 and paragraphs 35, 37 and 76 “ FIG. 2 shows functional parts of an embodiment of a system for controlling a plurality of autonomous vehicles, such as dumper truck 30, on a mine site 70, the system comprising a central platform 10, such as a fleet/traffic management system, the plurality of autonomous vehicles 30 and at least one portable device 40 or 50. The portable device may be a hand held device 40 or a personnel location tag 50. Even though FIG. 2 only shows two portables devices 40 and 50, the system may comprise a plurality of portable devices 40 and/or a plurality of portable devices 50 ”, “ The centralized platform 10 may comprise a mission controller 14 configured to determine and communicate missions to the vehicles 30. In particular, the centralized platform 10 may be configured to provide predetermined trajectories to the autonomous vehicles 30 ” and “ the user interface of the portable device may be configured for selecting at least one vehicle out of the plurality of autonomous vehicles and for inputting an inhibit command for inhibiting motion of the selected vehicle ”), wherein, among the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30), an autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target performs determination of whether an own movable body of the autonomous movable body (30) is located within a stoppable region, and stops based on a result of the determination (see at least Whitfield Fig 6. and paragraph 106 “ The vehicles 30 may be configured to send out identification information and/or location information by direct communication. This may be part of a V2V communication as described in co-pending application U.S. Ser. No. 16/460,693 filed on Jul. 2, 2019, the content of which is included by reference in its entirety. In particular, the vehicles 30 may be configured to send out identification information and/or location information by direct communication at regular intervals. In particular, the direct autonomous machine to autonomous machine communication of position and heading may be used for collision avoidance using the second communication interface also used to communicate with the portable device. The same concept may also be used for portable or fixed devices mounted in a car and moving towards an autonomous truck. Thereby, collision avoidance/V2V functionality may be integrated within the wireless safety system RF infrastructure ” and stop as shown in Fig.6). In Reference to Claim 2 The autonomous movable body control system according to claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein when the autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target determines that the own movable body (30) is located within the stoppable region, the autonomous movable body (30) ceases further movement to stop, and when the autonomous movable body determines that the own movable body (30) is not located within the stoppable region, the autonomous movable body (30) stops after moving to the stoppable region (the system of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) is capable of performing the function as recited above) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 35, 37, 76, 106). In Reference to Claim 3 The autonomous movable body control system according to claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein when the control device (10) receives a predetermined operation via an operation part (40), the control device (10) transmits a first control signal for controlling an autonomous movable body (30) of the control target to the autonomous movable body (30) of the control target (for steps such as steps (708, 716), and transmits a second control signal for performing the determination to the autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target (as shown in Fig. 6 which determines the location of vehicle (30)) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 35, 37, 76, 100, 105-111, 160 and 161). In Reference to Claim 4 The autonomous movable body control system according to claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1 above), wherein: when the control device receives a predetermined operation via an operation part, the control device (10) transmits a third control signal to all of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30), the third control signal including target information for identifying an autonomous movable body (30) of the control target and control information for controlling the autonomous movable body (30) of the control target (60) (for steps such as step (716); and each of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) determines whether an own movable body thereof is the autonomous movable body other than the control target, based on the third control signal (“ In an embodiment, the system may further comprise a personnel location tag configured to constantly inhibit motion of all vehicles out of the plurality of autonomous vehicles present within a predetermined distance from the personnel identification tag and/or configured to make its location visible to the central platform ” and vehicle (30) is capable of determining that the current location is not within (60) as shown in Fig. 6) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 19 and 105-11). In Reference to Claim 5 An autonomous movable body (30) that belongs to a group including a plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30), the autonomous movable body (30) comprising: a receiver (31) that receives a control signal (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 43 “ The autonomous vehicles 30 may each be provided with a first communication interface 31 for establishing communication with the first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform 10. The first communication interface 31 of the autonomous vehicles may be used for receiving predetermined missions from the first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform 10 ”); and a controller (21) that, when the controller (21) receives a second control signal (as shown in Fig. 6) different from a first control signal that uses at least one of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) as a control target (steps 708 or 716) (“ At 708, method 700 includes determining a user input requesting to inhibit a selected vehicle has been received. The user input may include a touch input to the displayed indication of each respective distance, such as a touch input selecting a vehicle from the user interface as shown in FIG. 5, or a touch input selecting a vehicle from the map-like graphical representation shown in FIG. 4. In other examples, the user input may include depression of one or more mechanical or electronic buttons, such as selection of a vehicle via input to the up and down buttons shown in FIG. 5. Once a vehicle is selected, an additional user input may be entered to request that an inhibit command be sent for that vehicle, such as a touch input to or depression of an inhibit control button on the user interface. In some examples, after an initial selection and request to inhibit, a confirmation request may be output and a user input may be received confirming the inhibit request ”), performs determination of whether an own movable body of the autonomous movable body (30) is located within a stoppable region, and stops the autonomous movable body based on the determination (see at least Whitfield Figs. 6 and paragraphs 105-106 “ FIG. 6 shows an embodiment where there is both communication 90 via the first communication interfaces with the centralized platform 10 and direct communication 100 between the portable device and the vehicles 30 via the second communication interfaces ” and “ The vehicles 30 may be configured to send out identification information and/or location information by direct communication. This may be part of a V2V communication as described in co-pending application U.S. Ser. No. 16/460,693 filed on Jul. 2, 2019, the content of which is included by reference in its entirety. In particular, the vehicles 30 may be configured to send out identification information and/or location information by direct communication at regular intervals. In particular, the direct autonomous machine to autonomous machine communication of position and heading may be used for collision avoidance using the second communication interface also used to communicate with the portable device. The same concept may also be used for portable or fixed devices mounted in a car and moving towards an autonomous truck. Thereby, collision avoidance/V2V functionality may be integrated within the wireless safety system RF infrastructure ”). In Reference to Claim 7 A control device that transmits a control signal to each of a plurality of autonomous movable bodies that belong to a group, the control device comprising: an operation part (11) that receives an operation for controlling at least one of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies as a control target (via the portable device (40, 50) (see at least Whitfield Fig. 2 and paragraph 39 “ For communication between the centralized platform and the vehicles 30, the portable devices 40 and the personnel location tags 50, the centralized platform 10 is provided with a first communication interface 11. The first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform may be used to communicate missions to the autonomous vehicles 30. A mission may in particular comprise a trajectory for the autonomous vehicle 30 to follow on the mission. The first communication interface 11 may further be used to receive location or status information from the autonomous vehicles 30 and/or the portable devices 40, 50 ”); and a transmitter (11) that, based on the operation, transmits a first control signal for controlling an autonomous movable body of the control target to the autonomous movable body of the control target, and transmits a second control signal to an autonomous movable body other than the control target, the second control signal causing the autonomous movable body other than the control target to perform a determination of whether an own movable body thereof is located within a stoppable region, and stop based on a result of the determination. In Reference to Claim 8 A control device that transmits a control signal to each of a plurality of autonomous movable bodies that belong to a group, the control device comprising: an operation part (11) that receives an operation for controlling at least one of the plurality of autonomous movable bodies (30) as a control target (via the portable device (40, 50) (see at least Whitfield Fig. 2 and paragraph 39 “ For communication between the centralized platform and the vehicles 30, the portable devices 40 and the personnel location tags 50, the centralized platform 10 is provided with a first communication interface 11. The first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform may be used to communicate missions to the autonomous vehicles 30. A mission may in particular comprise a trajectory for the autonomous vehicle 30 to follow on the mission. The first communication interface 11 may further be used to receive location or status information from the autonomous vehicles 30 and/or the portable devices 40, 50 ”); and a transmitter (11) that, based on the operation, transmits a third control signal to all of the autonomous movable bodies (30) in the group, the third control signal including target information identifying an autonomous movable body (30) of the control target and control information for controlling an autonomous movable body (30) of the control target (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 101 and 102 “ In an embodiment, the centralized platform 10 may be configured to determine the subset of the plurality of vehicles present within the predetermined distance to a portable device. In the first and the second embodiment, the centralized platform may send identification information regarding the vehicles from the subset to the portable device ” and “ In an embodiment, the centralized platform may control all the vehicles from the subset to turn into an inhibit state after receipt of a local emergency stop command from the portable device, or to constantly control any vehicle from the subset to turn into an inhibit state ”) . 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitfield in view of Pub No. US 2023/02347881 A9 to Tam et. al. (Tam) . In Reference to Claim 6 Whitfield teaches (bolded and italic recitations below): An autonomous movable body (30) that belongs to a group including a plurality of autonomous movable bodies, the autonomous movable body (30) comprising: a receiver that receives a control signal (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 43 “ The autonomous vehicles 30 may each be provided with a first communication interface 31 for establishing communication with the first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform 10. The first communication interface 31 of the autonomous vehicles may be used for receiving predetermined missions from the first communication interface 11 of the centralized platform 10 ”); and a controller (21) that, when the controller (21) receives a third control signal that includes target information for identifying an autonomous movable body (30) of the control target among the plurality of the autonomous movable bodies (30) and control information for controlling the autonomous movable body (30) of the control target (60), determines whether an own movable body (30) of the autonomous movable body (30) belonging to the group is of an autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target (60) (by not following the inhibit command) (see at least Whitfield Figs. 2-7 and paragraphs 70 and 164, “ In an embodiment, the subset of vehicles is determined based on a distance 60 with respect to the portable device 40. In an embodiment, the subset of vehicles may be determined by selecting all vehicles out of the plurality of autonomous vehicles present within a predetermined distance 60 of the portable device 40. In an embodiment, the predetermined distance 60 may be configurable. In particular, the predetermined distance 60 may be configurable from the centralized platform 10 or from the user interface of the portable device 40 ” and “ If a user input requesting a local or global E-stop is received, method 700 proceeds to 718 to send an inhibit command to a subset of or all autonomous vehicles on site ”), and when it is determined that the own movable body (30) is of the autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target, performs determination of whether the own movable body (30) is located within a stoppable region, and stops the autonomous movable body (30) belonging to the group based on a result of the determination . Whitfield do not explicitly teach (bolded and italic recitations above) as to when it is determined that the own movable body (30) is of the autonomous movable body (30) other than the control target, performs determination of whether the own movable body (30) is located within a stoppable region, and stops the autonomous movable body (30) belonging to the group based on a result of the determination. However, it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine if when it is determined that the own movable body is of the autonomous movable body other than the control target, performs determination of whether the own movable body is located within a stoppable region, and stops the autonomous movable body belonging to the group based on a result of the determination. For example, Tam teaches to when it is determined that the own movable body is of the autonomous movable body (100) other than the control target (during normal operation), performs determination of whether the own movable body (100) is located within a stoppable region (hazard zones), and stops the autonomous movable body (100) belonging to the group based on a result of the determination. Tam further teaches that performing such step provides safety and better driving conditions (see at least Tam Figs. 1, 4-5 and paragraphs 42, 59, 124, 154-155). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Whitfield with the step of when it is determined that the own movable body is of the autonomous movable body other than the control target (during normal operation), performs determination of whether the own movable body is located within a stoppable region (hazard zones), and stops the autonomous movable body belonging to the group based on a result of the determination as taught by Tam in order to provide safety and better driving conditions . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pub No. US 2020/0240799 A1 to Gao et. al. (Gao) teaches to stop the vehicle when the vehicles reaches a destination or to a legally stoppable location. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON DONGPA LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3525. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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. /BRANDON D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662 March 13, 2026 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 2 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 3 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 4 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 5 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 6 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 7 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 8 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 9 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 10 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 11 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 12 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 13 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 14 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 15 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 16 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 17 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/032,837 Page 18 Art Unit: 3662
Prosecution Insights