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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s submission filed on 1/23/2025 (with Apparent priority date of 10/13/2021). Claims 1-20 are pending of which claims 1, and 11 are independent. As such, claims 1-20 have been examined.
This Application was published as US20250166628.
This Application is a continuation of 17/644,394 issued as U.S. 12217751. A Terminal Disclaimer over the term of the parent is required as provided below.
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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7, 14, 16-22 and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 12217751 (hereinafter as the ‘751 patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the issued patent are narrower in scope than that of the instant application.
Patent (12217751)
1. A computer-implemented method when executed on data processing hardware of an assistant-enabled device causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
in response to receiving a response to an initial query submitted by a user of the assistant- enabled device to a digital assistant, instructing an always-on first processor of the data processing hardware to operate in a follow-on query detection mode and an active second processor of the data processing hardware to return to a sleep state;
and while the always-on first processor operates in the follow-on query detection mode: receiving, at the always-on first processor, follow-on audio data captured by the assistant-enabled device in an environment of the assistant-enabled device, the follow-on audio data not containing a hotword;
determining, using a voice activity detection (VAD) model executing on the always- on first processor, whether or not the VAD model detects voice activity in the follow-on audio data;
performing, using a speaker identification (SID) model executing on the always-on first processor, speaker verification on the follow-on audio data to determine whether the follow-on audio data comprises an utterance spoken by the same user that submitted the initial query to the digital assistant;
and when the VAD model detects voice activity in the follow-on audio data and the follow-on audio data comprises the utterance spoken by the same user that submitted the initial query, initiating a wake-up process on a second processor of the data processing hardware to determine whether the utterance comprises a follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant.
Current App. (19035299)1. A computer-implemented method when executed on data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
based on providing a response to an initial query for output from an assistant-enabled device, instructing an always-on first processor of the data processing hardware to operate in a follow-on query detection mode and an active second processor of the data processing hardware to return to a sleep state;
and while the always-on first processor operates in the follow-on query detection mode: receiving follow-on audio data captured by the assistant-enabled device;
performing, using a speaker identification (SID) model executing on the always-on first processor, speaker verification on the follow-on audio data to determine the follow-on audio data comprises an utterance spoken by a same user that submitted the initial query to a digital assistant; and
based on the follow-on audio data comprising the utterance spoken by the same user that spoke the initial query, initiating a wake-up process on the second processor to determine whether the utterance comprises a follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant.
Claim 11 of the instant application is similarly recited by claim 16 of ‘751 patent, and therefore are rejected under a similar rationale as claim 1.
Although claim 16 of the issued patent ‘761 is an assistant enabled device (AED) and claim 11 of the instant application is a system claim, it would have been obvious to use the AED claim of the issued patent in a system environment to realize the AED claim and having a system version of the AED claim is obvious. Similar rationale can be applied to dependent claims generated from claim 16.
Claims 2 and 3 of the instant application is rejected by claim 1 of the ‘751 patent,
Claim 4 of the instant application is rejected by claim 2 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 5 of the instant application is rejected by claim 3 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 6 of the instant application is rejected by claim 4 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 7 of the instant application is rejected by claim 5 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 8 of the instant application is rejected by claim 6 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 9 of the instant application is rejected by claim 7 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 10 of the instant application is rejected by claim 14 of the ‘751 patent.
Similarly, claims 12 and 13 of the instant application is rejected by claim 16 of the ‘751 patent,
Claim 14 of the instant application is rejected by claim 17 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 15 of the instant application is rejected by claim 18 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 16 of the instant application is rejected by claim 19 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 17 of the instant application is rejected by claim 20 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 18 of the instant application is rejected by claim 21 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 19 of the instant application is rejected by claim 22 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim 20 of the instant application is rejected by claim 29 of the ‘751 patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-4 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rand (US 20190230458), in view of Zheng (US 20210327436).
Regarding Claim 1, Rand discloses: 1. A computer-implemented method when executed on data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising: ([0001] The present disclosure relates to the field of always-on detection systems. In particular, the present disclosure relates to a system and method for providing an acknowledgement output in response to detection of a trigger signal in an always-on detection system.)
([0048] mobile phone, tablet, laptop computer, smart speaker, smart tv and etc), instructing an always-on first processor of the data processing hardware to operate in a ([0007] According to a first aspect, the invention provides a system for providing an acknowledgement output at an output transducer of a device in response to detection of a trigger signal, the system comprising: an input transducer; a signal processor coupled to the input transducer; a main processor separate from the signal processor; and an output driver, wherein the signal processor is configured to: monitor an input signal received at the signal processor from the input transducer; and if the received input signal corresponds to the trigger signal: output an acknowledgement signal to the output driver to cause the output driver to drive the output transducer to output the acknowledgement output; and output an interrupt signal to the main processor to cause the main processor to enter an active state.) [although the claim recites an active second processor to return to a sleep state, to a PHOSTA, it is obvious when the main processor is not needed, to put it in a sleep or standby mode to save power consumption] in para 0058, it is explicitly disclose by the reference “To increase the power efficiency of the device 100, the main processor 134 is configured to enter an inactive or sleep state when it is not required. The signal processor 102 and the always-on audio detection system 104 remain active at all times, in order to detect audio triggers indicating that the user requires the device 100 to perform an action in response to a user command.”
and while the always-on first processor operates in the follow-on query detection mode: receiving ([0058] To increase the power efficiency of the device 100, the main processor 134 is configured to enter an inactive or sleep state when it is not required. The signal processor 102 and the always-on audio detection system 104 remain active at all times, in order to detect audio triggers indicating that the user requires the device 100 to perform an action in response to a user command.)
([0007] According to a first aspect, the invention provides a system for providing an acknowledgement output at an output transducer of a device in response to detection of a trigger signal, the system comprising: an input transducer; a signal processor coupled to the input transducer; a main processor separate from the signal processor; and an output driver, wherein the signal processor is configured to: monitor an input signal received at the signal processor from the input transducer; and if the received input signal corresponds to the trigger signal: output an acknowledgement signal to the output driver to cause the output driver to drive the output transducer to output the acknowledgement output; and output an interrupt signal to the main processor to cause the main processor to enter an active state.)
Rand does not appear to disclose the following feature, which is taught my Zheng, in the related art.
Zheng discloses: based on providing a response to an initial query for output from an assistant-enabled device … operate in a follow-on query detection mode ([0040] Specifically, the terminal 101 may be an intelligent voice terminal, and may detect a voice interaction indication initiated by a user, for example, a wakeup keyword said by the user, a button for initiating voice interaction, or some sounds or operations predefined by the user. The terminal responds to the voice interaction indication initiated by the user, and enters a voice interaction working state. Different from an indication, such as pure detection of the wakeup keyword, for initiating voice interaction, the voice interaction working state, or referred to as a voice interaction conversation state, is a state in which the terminal 101 may invoke various processing resources to process received voice information, and output a corresponding processing result or operation. After receiving first voice information sent by the user, the terminal device 101 outputs a processing result for the first voice information, for example, answering a question of the user, and triggering operations such as joining a conference or turning on a microphone. After executing an instruction corresponding to the first voice information, the terminal 101 may further determine whether the user intends to continue a conversation. [0098] The processor 701 may invoke the program code to perform the operations in the method embodiments shown in FIG. 2 to FIG. 5. -which processor is always on.) [Rand also disclose an always on processor, see [0058] The signal processor 102 and the always-on audio detection system 104 remain active at all times, in order to detect audio triggers indicating that the user requires the device 100 to perform an action in response to a user command.]
performing, using a speaker identification (SID) model executing on the always-on first processor, speaker verification on the follow-on audio data to determine the follow-on audio data comprises an utterance spoken by a same user that submitted the initial query to a digital assistant; (see fig. 3, flow chart - A speaker is a same person as a speaker in the previous session, also see fig. 6, speaker voiceprint comparison unit) Also see para 0043, voiceprint recognition.
and based on the follow-on audio data comprising the utterance spoken by the same user that spoke the initial query, initiating a wake-up process on the second processor to determine whether the utterance comprises a follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant. (see fig. 3, flow chart. Determination is made is the subsequent conversation is a continuation of the previous conversation.)
Rand and Zheng are considered analogous art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Rand to combine the teaching of Zheng for the above mentioned feature, because the application provides a voice interaction method, a terminal device, and a system, to reduce redundant wakeup in a voice interaction process by determining a user's intention of continuing a conversation, thereby improving user experience (Zheng, [0005]).
Regarding Claim 2, Rand and Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Zheng further discloses: wherein the follow-on audio data does not include a hotword. ([0048] A system for implementing voice interaction in this embodiment of the present invention supports, by enhancing in the voice interaction process, conversation intention recognition of the speaker, that a voice command can be continuously sent to the system without the user saying the wakeup keyword again (or another wakeup manner) after a session.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Regarding Claim 3, Rand and Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Rand further discloses: wherein the data processing hardware resides on the assistant-enabled device. ([0048] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram showing part of a device 100 having a signal processor 102 including an always-on audio detection system 104. The device 100 may be, for example, a mobile telephone, tablet or laptop computer, smart watch, virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR) device, smart speaker or smart television. For the sake of clarity elements of the device 100 which are not relevant to the present disclosure are not shown in FIG. 1, but those skilled in the art will appreciate that the device 100 may include further elements and components in addition to those shown in FIG. 1.)
Regarding Claim 4, Rand and Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Zheng further discloses: wherein instructing the always-on first processor of the data processing hardware to operate in the follow-on query detection mode causes the always-on first processor to initiate execution of the SID model on the always-on first processor during operation in the follow-on query detection model. ([0042] the terminal 101 itself may integrate all or some functions required for implementing all intelligent voice interaction in this embodiment of the present invention.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Regarding Claim 11, Rand discloses:11. A system comprising: data processing hardware; and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware and storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising: (see fig. 1, system 100, processor (128), memory (108) memory would be able to store instructions to perform operations)
As for the rest of the claim, they recite the elements of claim 1, therefore the rationale applied in rejection of claim 1 is also applicable to claim 11.
Claims 12-14 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 2-4 respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 5-10 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rand (US 20190230458), in view of Zheng (US 20210327436), and further in view of Smith (US 20210366476).
Regarding Claim 5, Rand and Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Rand and Zheng do not appear to disclose disabling a hotword detection model during operation in the follow on query detection mode.
Smith in the related art discloses: wherein instructing the always-on first processor of the data processing hardware to operate in the follow-on query detection mode causes the always-on first processor to disable a hotword detection model during operation in the follow-on query detection mode. ([0034] during the listening window a voice assistant wakeword detector is disabled and only command keywords are listened for, or some but not all voice assistant wakeword detectors are disabled during the listening window. This may allow local processing resources to be used most effectively during the listening window.)
Rand/Zheng/Smith are considered analogous art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Rand/Zheng to combine the teaching of Smith for the above mentioned feature, because this may allow local processing resources to be used most effectively during the listening window (Smith, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 6, Rand and Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Zheng further discloses: wherein initiating the wake-up process on the second processor causes the second processor to perform operations comprising:
processing the follow-on audio data to generate a transcription of the utterance spoken by the same user that submitted the initial query; ([0045] The voice recognition and semantic understanding server 104 converts a voice signal collected and uploaded by the terminal into a text and semantics, and sends the text and the semantics to the terminal 101 or another server for processing.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Rand and Zheng do not appear to disclose perform query interpretation on the transcription to determine if the utterance comprises follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant.
Smith in the related art discloses: and performing query interpretation on the transcription to determine whether or not the utterance comprises the follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant. ([0026] When a VAS receives detected-sound data, the VAS processes this data, which involves identifying the voice input and determining an intent of words captured in the voice input. The VAS may then provide a response back to the NMD with some instruction according to the determined intent. Based on that instruction, the NMD may cause one or more smart devices to perform an action.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be determining the intent of the query would allow the voice assistant to provide accurate response which would lead to better end user experience.
Regarding Claim 7, Rand/Zheng/Smith disclose all the element of claim 6.
Zheng further discloses: wherein the operations further comprise, when the utterance comprises the follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant: instructing the digital assistant to perform an operation specified by the follow-on query; ([0057] S204: The terminal receives second voice information,…the terminal outputs a processing result in response to the second voice information,)
receiving, from the digital assistant, a follow-on response indicating performance of the operation specified by the follow-on query; ([0053] The user says the wakeup keyword “meeting” or “Hi, Scotty”. After detecting the wakeup keyword, the system plays an answer prompt tone, and enters a voice instruction listening state (which is also a type of voice interaction working state). The terminal may further display a voice assistant user interface on a screen. The interface includes content such as command prompt information and a voice system status indication. The terminal may interact with the user through an ASR service, an NLP service, and a conversation management function. The ASR is automatic speech recognition, and the NLP is natural language processing. [0054] S203: The terminal receives first voice information, and outputs a processing result for the first voice information. [0055] Then, the user says a voice instruction, such as “Join a conference”. A voice signal is recognized (locally recognized or sent to a voice recognition server), and a recognition result is returned. A conference terminal performs a task of joining a conference based on the returned result.)
and presenting, for output from the assistant-enabled device, the follow-on response. ([0053] The user says the wakeup keyword “meeting” or “Hi, Scotty”. After detecting the wakeup keyword, the system plays an answer prompt tone, and enters a voice instruction listening state (which is also a type of voice interaction working state). The terminal may further display a voice assistant user interface on a screen. The interface includes content such as command prompt information and a voice system status indication. The terminal may interact with the user through an ASR service, an NLP service, and a conversation management function. The ASR is automatic speech recognition, and the NLP is natural language processing.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Regarding Claim 8, Rand/Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Rand further discloses: wherein initiating the wake-up process on the second processor causes the second processor to transmit the follow-on audio data to a remote server via a network, the follow-on audio data when received by the remote server causing the remote server to perform operations comprising: ([0075] While the signal processor 102 is performing steps 222 and 224 to provide a rapid acknowledgement to the user that the audio trigger and command have been received, the main processor 134, having received the audio trigger and command from the always-on audio detection system 104, enters its active or awake state (at step 232), and, at step 234, transmits the audio trigger via the Internet to a remote server for verification of the audio trigger.)
Zheng further discloses: processing the follow-on audio data to generate a transcription of the utterance spoken by the same user that submitted the initial query; ([0045] The voice recognition and semantic understanding server 104 converts a voice signal collected and uploaded by the terminal into a text and semantics, and sends the text and the semantics to the terminal 101 or another server for processing.)
and when the utterance comprises the follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant, instructing the digital assistant to perform an operation specified by the follow- on query. ([0057] S204: The terminal receives second voice information,…the terminal outputs a processing result in response to the second voice information,)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Rand and Zheng do not appear to disclose perform query interpretation on the transcription to determine if the utterance comprises follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant.
Smith in the related art discloses: performing query interpretation on the transcription to determine whether or not the utterance comprises the follow-on query directed toward the digital assistant; ([0026] When a VAS receives detected-sound data, the VAS processes this data, which involves identifying the voice input and determining an intent of words captured in the voice input. The VAS may then provide a response back to the NMD with some instruction according to the determined intent. Based on that instruction, the NMD may cause one or more smart devices to perform an action.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be determining the intent of the query would allow the voice assistant to provide accurate response which would lead to better end user experience.
Regarding Claim 9, Rand/Zheng/Smith disclose all the element of claim 8.
Rand further discloses: wherein the operations further comprise, after instructing the digital assistant to perform the operation specified by the follow-on query: receiving, from the digital assistant, a follow-on response indicating performance of the operation specified by the follow-on query; ([0053] The user says the wakeup keyword “meeting” or “Hi, Scotty”. After detecting the wakeup keyword, the system plays an answer prompt tone, and enters a voice instruction listening state (which is also a type of voice interaction working state). The terminal may further display a voice assistant user interface on a screen. The interface includes content such as command prompt information and a voice system status indication. The terminal may interact with the user through an ASR service, an NLP service, and a conversation management function. The ASR is automatic speech recognition, and the NLP is natural language processing. [0054] S203: The terminal receives first voice information, and outputs a processing result for the first voice information. [0055] Then, the user says a voice instruction, such as “Join a conference”. A voice signal is recognized (locally recognized or sent to a voice recognition server), and a recognition result is returned. A conference terminal performs a task of joining a conference based on the returned result.)
and presenting, for output from the assistant-enabled device, the follow-on response. ([0053] The user says the wakeup keyword “meeting” or “Hi, Scotty”. After detecting the wakeup keyword, the system plays an answer prompt tone, and enters a voice instruction listening state (which is also a type of voice interaction working state). The terminal may further display a voice assistant user interface on a screen. The interface includes content such as command prompt information and a voice system status indication. The terminal may interact with the user through an ASR service, an NLP service, and a conversation management function. The ASR is automatic speech recognition, and the NLP is natural language processing.)
Where the rationale for the combination would be similar to the one already provided.
Regarding Claim 10, Rand/Zheng disclose all the element of claim 1.
Rand further discloses: wherein: the always-on first processor comprises a
and the second processor comprises an application processor. ([0057] The device 100 also includes a main processor 134, which may be, for example, an application processor.)
Rand and Zheng do not appear to disclose a DSP processor.
Smith in the related art discloses: a digital signal processor (DSP); ([0093] In example implementations, the voice processing components 220 may include or otherwise take the form of one or more DSPs or one or more modules of a DSP.)
The motivation for the combination would be using a DSP would enable high speed execution, energy efficient and provide offloading of the main processor.
Claims 15-20 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 5-10 respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Tulli (US 20180330727)- discloses system/method that use two stage speech recognition using an always on wakeword detector that use a low power processor and an application processor that can standby or in sleep mode when not used to conserve power. See Abstract, and para 0015 for additional details.
Lee (US 20200160863) – discloses power management that manages memory and processing needed to listen to and recognize voice commands using sub processor that monitors wakeup continuously a main processor that stays asleep or in low power mode until wakeup word is detected. See Abstract, para 0083 and figs. 4a, 7, 12, and 15 for additional details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip H Lam whose telephone number is (571)272-1721. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-2 PM Pacific time.
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, Bhavesh Mehta can be reached on 571-272-7453. 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.
/PHILIP H LAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2656
Prosecution Insights