CTNF 19/197,286 CTNF 97047 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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/02/2025 and 04/10/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 6 , the claim recites “controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in the contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair; … controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located on the contact range between the first swing leg group and the third stair.” Based on the claim language, the claim should read, “controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot to remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in the contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair; … controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot to remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located on the contact range between the first swing leg group and the third stair.” Appropriate correction is required. 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 Claim 3, 6-7 and 17 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. Regarding claim 3 , the claim language recites “ … controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing with the second swing leg group as the support leg such that an extension direction of the first swing leg group is parallel to a gravity direction; controlling the first swing leg group to extend and swing such that the first swing leg group is located on the third stair; controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that an extension direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction …”. It’s unclear based on the claim language, whether the swing leg is retracted and extended simultaneously or what leg configuration is used. More specifically, the claim recites “such that an extension direction of the first swing leg group is parallel to a gravity direction” which indicates the extension of the leg is the result of the retraction operation mentioned earlier which clearly contradicts each other. For the purpose of examination, Examiner considers the language to read “ … controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing with the second swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the first swing leg group is parallel to a gravity direction; controlling the first swing leg group to extend and swing such that the first swing leg group is located on the third stair; controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction …”. Regarding claim 17 , it is rejected for the same reasons as provided in the rejection of claim 3 mutandis mutatis. Regarding claim 6 , the claim language recites “ … controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in the contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair; controlling the mobile robot to tilt forward; driving the at least one second wheel of the second swing leg group and the at least one first wheel of the first swing leg group; controlling a horizontal position and a vertical height of the mobile robot remain unchanged such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located on the contact range between the first swing leg group and the third stair.” It’s unclear based on the claim language, how the horizontal position and the vertical height of the mobile robot remain unchanged while the robot is driven to swing the leg between stairs. The robot position would change when the leg is driven in order to swing to the next stairs. Regarding claim 7 , it is either directly or indirectly dependent upon rejected base claim 6, and also inherit the deficiencies described above. Therefore, it is also rejected under this section for at least it’s dependency upon a rejected base claim. Appropriate corrections are required. Examiner notes wherein all claims have been addressed below in view of the prior art of record, as best understood by the Examiner , in light of the 35 USC 112 rejections provided herein. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonehara (JP 2007130701 A) . Regarding claim 1, Sonehara teaches a method for controlling a mobile robot, performed by a controller of the mobile robot ( page 2 7 th para wherein “A leg-wheel type mobile robot comprising an ankle / wheel drive unit, and a walking control device for controlling the support leg and the ankle / wheel drive unit ”), and the method comprising: controlling a first swing leg group to be located on a first stair or a first support surface, and controlling a second swing leg group to be located on a second stair ( Fig 3-4 wherein the first leg 14 and second leg 16 are located in different stairs ); controlling the first swing leg group to swing to a third stair with the second swing leg group as a support leg ( Fig 3 wherein the leg 14 swings to the third stair with support from leg 16 ); and wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group comprise a plurality of swing legs ( Fig 3-5 wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group collectively comprise a plurality of legs ), wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group are distributed side by side ( Fig 3-5) , and wherein the rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane ( Fig 1-5 wherein both the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group rotate around a common axis located in the same vertical plane ). However, Sonehara fails to teach controlling the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Sonehara further teaches having a number of stairs wherein the robot climbs the stairs ( page 2, 10 th para wherein “According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, in the staircase walking method of climbing stairs ”) and rotation shaft for rotating components ( page 2, 4 th para wherein “In addition, as shown in FIG. 6, the “leg structure of a mobile robot” disclosed in Patent Document 2 has a foot 63 attached to a leg 61 via an ankle shaft 62 and a wheel attached to a foot 63 via a wheel shaft 64. 65, a single actuator 66 capable of driving the ankle shaft 62 and the wheel shaft 65 is provided ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Sonehara’s teachings of having a mobile robot comprising the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group and rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane to incorporate Sonehara’s teachings of robot climbing stairs and having rotation shaft for rotating components in order to have the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 2, modified Sonehara teaches controlling the first swing leg group to telescope and swing to the third stair with the second swing leg group as the support leg and controlling the second swing leg group to telescope and swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as the support leg ( Fig 3 page 3, 4 th last para wherein “Thus, the length of the support legs 14 and 16 is changed while both legs are grounded, and the center of gravity is moved forward (rightward in the figure)” ). Regarding claim 3, modified Sonehara teaches controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing with the second swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the first swing leg group is parallel to a gravity direction ( Fig 3 step 3 wherein the leg 14 is swings and retracts the leg in upward direction ); controlling the first swing leg group to extend and swing such that the first swing leg group is located on the third stair ( Fig 3 step 4-6 wherein the leg 14 extends and steps on third stair ). However, Sonehara fails to teach controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction; and controlling the second swing leg group to extend and swing such that the second swing leg group is located on the fourth stair. As discussed earlier, Sonehara teaches using both feet to climb stairs during robot operation ( page 2, 10 th para wherein “According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, in the staircase walking method of climbing stairs ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Sonehara’s teachings of controlling the first swing leg group to retract and controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing to incorporate Sonehara’s teachings of using both feet to climb stairs during robot operation in order to have controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that an extension direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction; and controlling the second swing leg group to extend and swing such that the second swing leg group is located on the fourth stair. Doing so would allow the robot to climb various number of stairs as needed during robot operation. Regarding claim 4, modified Sonehara teaches wherein the second stair is higher than the first stair and the first support surface, the second stair and the third stair are adjacent stairs, the third stair is higher than the second stair ( Fig 3 ), wherein the second swing leg group is not in contact with a side wall of the third stair when the second swing leg group is located on the second stair, the third stair and the fourth stair are adjacent stairs, the fourth stair is higher than the third stair, and wherein the first swing leg group is not in contact with a side wall of the fourth stair when the first swing leg group is located on the third stair ( Fig 3, as modified in claim 1, adjacent stairs of different height are provided for robot operation in which the first and second leg operate with similar technique including the leg not being in contact with the side wall ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonehara (JP 2007130701 A) in view of Atsushi (JP 2003340763 A) . Regarding claim 5, modified Sonehara teaches all the limitations of claim 1 including controlling the mobile robot to swing first and second leg to different stairs. However, Sonehara fails to teach to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair; and to tilt forward such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the first swing leg group and the third stair before the second swing leg group swings to the fourth stair. Atsushi teaches to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair ( para 0027 Fig 5-6 wherein “At this time, since the ZMP 22 extending from the center of gravity 20 is located inside the support polygon formed by the foot 5 of the leg 3 and the floor 60, the biped walking robot 1 will not fall even if it is supported on one foot ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Sonehara’s teachings of controlling the mobile robot to swing first and second leg to different stairs to incorporate Atsushi’s teachings to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair in order to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair; and to tilt forward such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the first swing leg group and the third stair before the second swing leg group swings to the fourth stair. Doing so would allow the robot to climb various number of stairs using both feet while maintain stability . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 15-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonehara (JP 2007130701 A) in view of Whitman (US 20200324412 A1) . Regarding claim 15, Sonehara teaches an apparatus for controlling a mobile robot ( page 2 7 th para wherein “A leg-wheel type mobile robot comprising an ankle / wheel drive unit, and a walking control device for controlling the support leg and the ankle / wheel drive unit ”), executing: controlling a first swing leg group to be located on a first stair or a first support surface, and controlling a second swing leg group to be located on a second stair ( Fig 3-4 wherein the first leg 14 and second leg 16 are located in different stairs ); controlling the first swing leg group to swing to a third stair with the second swing leg group as a support leg ( Fig 3 wherein the leg 14 swings to the third stair with support from leg 16 ); and wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group comprise a plurality of swing legs ( Fig 3-5 wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group collectively comprise a plurality of legs ), wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group are distributed side by side ( Fig 3-5) , and wherein the rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane ( Fig 1-5 wherein both the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group rotate around a common axis located in the same vertical plane ). However, Sonehara fails to teach at least one memory configured to store program code; and at least one processor configured to read the program code and operate as instructed by the program code, the program code comprising: control code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to control various robot operations and controlling the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Sonehara further teaches having a number of stairs wherein the robot climbs the stairs ( page 2, 10 th para wherein “According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, in the staircase walking method of climbing stairs ”) and rotation shaft for rotating components ( page 2, 4 th para wherein “In addition, as shown in FIG. 6, the “leg structure of a mobile robot” disclosed in Patent Document 2 has a foot 63 attached to a leg 61 via an ankle shaft 62 and a wheel attached to a foot 63 via a wheel shaft 64. 65, a single actuator 66 capable of driving the ankle shaft 62 and the wheel shaft 65 is provided ”). Whitman teaches at least one memory configured to store program code; and at least one processor configured to read the program code and operate as instructed by the program code, the program code comprising: control code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to control various robot operations ( 0081 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Sonehara’s teachings of having a mobile robot comprising the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group and rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane to incorporate Sonehara’s teachings of robot climbing stairs and having rotation shaft for rotating components and Whitman’s teaching of having a memory and processor in order to have the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 16, modified Sonehara teaches controlling the first swing leg group to telescope and swing to the third stair with the second swing leg group as the support leg and controlling the second swing leg group to telescope and swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as the support leg ( Fig 3 page 3, 4 th last para wherein “Thus, the length of the support legs 14 and 16 is changed while both legs are grounded, and the center of gravity is moved forward (rightward in the figure)” ). Regarding claim 17, modified Sonehara teaches controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing with the second swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the first swing leg group is parallel to a gravity direction ( Fig 3 step 3 wherein the leg 14 is swings and retracts the leg in upward direction ); controlling the first swing leg group to extend and swing such that the first swing leg group is located on the third stair ( Fig 3 step 4-6 wherein the leg 14 extends and steps on third stair ). However, Sonehara fails to teach controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that a retraction direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction; and controlling the second swing leg group to extend and swing such that the second swing leg group is located on the fourth stair. As discussed earlier, Sonehara teaches using both feet to climb stairs during robot operation ( page 2, 10 th para wherein “According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, in the staircase walking method of climbing stairs ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Sonehara’s teachings of controlling the first swing leg group to retract and controlling the first swing leg group to retract and swing to incorporate Sonehara’s teachings of using both feet to climb stairs during robot operation in order to have controlling the second swing leg group to retract and swing with the first swing leg group as the support leg such that an extension direction of the second swing leg group is parallel to the gravity direction; and controlling the second swing leg group to extend and swing such that the second swing leg group is located on the fourth stair. Doing so would allow the robot to climb various number of stairs as needed during robot operation. Regarding claim 18, modified Sonehara teaches wherein the second stair is higher than the first stair and the first support surface, the second stair and the third stair are adjacent stairs, the third stair is higher than the second stair ( Fig 3 ), wherein the second swing leg group is not in contact with a side wall of the third stair when the second swing leg group is located on the second stair, the third stair and the fourth stair are adjacent stairs, the fourth stair is higher than the third stair, and wherein the first swing leg group is not in contact with a side wall of the fourth stair when the first swing leg group is located on the third stair ( Fig 3, as modified in claim 1, adjacent stairs of different height are provided for robot operation in which the first and second leg operate with similar technique including the leg not being in contact with the side wall ). Regarding claim 20, Sonehara teaches a controller for controlling a mobile robot ( page 2 7 th para wherein “A leg-wheel type mobile robot comprising an ankle / wheel drive unit, and a walking control device for controlling the support leg and the ankle / wheel drive unit ”), executing: controlling a first swing leg group to be located on a first stair or a first support surface, and controlling a second swing leg group to be located on a second stair ( Fig 3-4 wherein the first leg 14 and second leg 16 are located in different stairs ); controlling the first swing leg group to swing to a third stair with the second swing leg group as a support leg ( Fig 3 wherein the leg 14 swings to the third stair with support from leg 16 ); and wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group comprise a plurality of swing legs ( Fig 3-5 wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group collectively comprise a plurality of legs ), wherein the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group are distributed side by side ( Fig 3-5) , and wherein the rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane ( Fig 1-5 wherein both the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group rotate around a common axis located in the same vertical plane ). However, Sonehara fails to teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing computer code which, when executed by at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to execute operations and controlling the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Sonehara further teaches having a number of stairs wherein the robot climbs the stairs ( page 2, 10 th para wherein “According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, in the staircase walking method of climbing stairs ”) and rotation shaft for rotating components ( page 2, 4 th para wherein “In addition, as shown in FIG. 6, the “leg structure of a mobile robot” disclosed in Patent Document 2 has a foot 63 attached to a leg 61 via an ankle shaft 62 and a wheel attached to a foot 63 via a wheel shaft 64. 65, a single actuator 66 capable of driving the ankle shaft 62 and the wheel shaft 65 is provided ”). Whitman teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing computer code which, when executed by at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to execute operations ( 0081 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Sonehara’s teachings of having a mobile robot comprising the first swing leg group and the second swing leg group and rotation axis of the first swing leg group and the rotation axis of the second swing leg group are located in the same vertical plane to incorporate Sonehara’s teachings of robot climbing stairs and having rotation shaft for rotating components and Whitman’s teaching of having a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium in order to have the second swing leg group to swing to a fourth stair with the first swing leg group as a support leg, the leg groups comprise rotation shafts and are located in the same vertical plane. Doing so would constitute combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonehara (JP 2007130701 A) and Whitman (US 20200324412 A1) in view of Atsushi (JP 2003340763 A) . Regarding claim 19, modified Sonehara teaches all the limitations of claim 15 including controlling the mobile robot to swing first and second leg to different stairs. However, Sonehara fails to teach to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair; and to tilt forward such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the first swing leg group and the third stair before the second swing leg group swings to the fourth stair. Atsushi teaches to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair ( para 0027 Fig 5-6 wherein “At this time, since the ZMP 22 extending from the center of gravity 20 is located inside the support polygon formed by the foot 5 of the leg 3 and the floor 60, the biped walking robot 1 will not fall even if it is supported on one foot ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further modified Sonehara’s teachings of controlling the mobile robot to swing first and second leg to different stairs to incorporate Atsushi’s teachings to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair in order to tilt forward such that a projection of a center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the second swing leg group and the second stair before the first swing leg group swings to the third stair; and to tilt forward such that the projection of the center of gravity of the mobile robot is located in a contact area between the first swing leg group and the third stair before the second swing leg group swings to the fourth stair. Doing so would allow the robot to climb various number of stairs using both feet while maintain stability . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 8-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAGAR KC whose telephone number is (571)272-7337. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5 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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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. /SAGAR KC/Examiner, Art Unit 3657 /ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 2 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 3 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 4 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 5 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 6 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 7 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 8 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 9 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 10 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 11 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 12 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 13 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 14 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 15 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 16 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 17 Art Unit: 3657 Application/Control Number: 19/197,286 Page 18 Art Unit: 3657
Prosecution Insights