CTNF 19/211,991 CTNF 89058 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. Priority 02-25 AIA Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Germany on 05/24/2024 . It is noted, however, that Applicant has not filed a certified copy of the DE 10 2024 204 790.2 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the complete subject matter of claims 12-16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show what is described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Step 30 in Fig. 2 is labeled “ can information of functionality of primary actuation device be collected? ”; however, step 34 in Fig. 2 is connected to step 30 via an arrow labeled “N” (i.e., no), with step 34 being labeled “ collect information of functionality of primary actuation device in second collection mode ,” and the substitute specification filed 07/08/2025 differently discloses in line 27 of page 9 to line 2 of page 10 that “ In method step 30, it is checked whether information on the functionality of the primary actuation device 14 can be collected by the secondary actuation device 16 in a first collection mode using electronic communication 26 between the primary and the secondary actuation device 14, 16 ,” which instead sets forth a query of “ can information of functionality of primary actuation device be collected in a first collection mode? ” Step 36 in Fig. 2 is labeled “ can secondary actuation device receive a braking request signal and it it functional? ” with step 36 being connected by an unlabeled arrow to step 38, with step 38 being labeled “disruption mode present?”; however, the substitute specification filed 07/08/2025 differently discloses in lines 14-20 of page 10 that “ In parallel to this, the secondary actuation device 16 automatically ascertains in method step 36 whether the secondary actuation device 16 can receive a braking request signal 20 and is functional. If the secondary actuation device 16 cannot receive a braking request signal 20 but is functional, the braking device 12 is put into a disruption mode, which is indicated by method step 38 ,” such that the unlabeled arrow between step 36 and step 38 fails to communicate the respective “yes” and “no” answers to the query “ can secondary actuation device receive a braking request signal and it it functional? ” of step 36, given that the unlabeled arrow appears to require both answers to the query “ can secondary actuation device receive a braking request signal and it it functional? ” of step 36 to be either “yes” or “no.” Step 38 in Fig. 2 is labeled “ disruption mode present? ”; however, the substitute specification filed 07/08/2025 differently discloses in lines 17-20 of page 10 that “ If the secondary actuation device 16 cannot receive a braking request signal 20 but is functional, the braking device 12 is put into a disruption mode, which is 20 indicated by method step 38 ,” which does not set forth a query of “ disruption mode present? ” and instead sets forth putting the braking device 12 into the “disruption mode.” Step 40 in Fig. 2 is labeled “ disruption mode present ”; however, the substitute specification filed 07/08/2025 differently discloses in lines 21-25 of page 10 that “ If the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device 14 is collected in method step 32 in the first collection mode, i.e. by electronic communication 26, then in method step 40 a check is carried out as to whether, on the one hand, the disruption mode 38 is present ,” which does not set forth a determination of “ disruption mode present ” and instead sets forth carrying out a check as to whether the “disruption mode” is present. The substitute specification filed 07/08/2025 further differently discloses in line 21 of page 10 to line 2 of page 11 that “ If the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device 14 is collected in method step 32 in the first collection mode, i.e. by electronic communication 26, then in method step 40 a check is carried out as to whether, on the one hand, the disruption mode 38 is present and, on the other hand, information on the functionality of the primary actuation device 14 is collected by the secondary actuation device 16 in the first collection mode, which information characterizes a non- functionality of the primary actuation device 14. If both are the case, the braking device 12 is automatically actuated by the secondary actuation device 16 in method step 42 in the sense of emergency braking ,” and the label “ disruption mode present ” ignores the check as to whether “ information on the functionality of the primary actuation device 14 is collected by the secondary actuation device 16 in the first collection mode, which information characterizes a non-functionality of the primary actuation device 14 ,” and the arrow between step 40 and step 42 is not labeled, despite corresponding to both queries being “yes.” The arrow between step 44 and step 42 is not labeled, despite corresponding to “no” via line 24 of page 11 to line 14 of page 12 of the substitute specification filed 07/08/2025. The drawings are also objected to because the label of box “36” of Fig. 2 of the Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025 includes “it it functional?” which appears to be a misstating of --[[it]] is it functional?--. 06-22 Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16 recites “functionalit” in line 8, which appears to be a misspelling of -- functionalit functionality --. Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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 10-18 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. New claim 10 recites “ a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned ” in lines 1-2; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “a primary and secondary actuation device,” as it is unclear how a device, such as an “actuation device,” would be both “primary” AND “secondary,” especially in the context of the phrasing “ to which … are assigned ,” which appears to require reference to plural claim elements, and it is unclear whether “a primary and secondary actuation device” is intended to differently introduce -- a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary actuation device and a secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned for generating respective hydraulic brake pressures --, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, with both of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 serving to generate a hydraulic braking pressure for wheel brakes 8 of a braking device 12, to which each of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 are assigned. New claim 10 also recites “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” in lines 3-4; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the primary and second actuation devices” because the claim fails to previously introduce “primary and second actuation devices.” Also, it is unclear whether the “primary and second actuation devices” referred to in line 3 is intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in lines 1-2 of the claim, and, in the former case, it is unclear whether “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” is a misstating of --the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation device device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics--, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 receiving a braking request signal 18 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, receiving a braking request signal 20, different from the braking request signal 18. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 10 also refers to each of “the primary actuation device” in line 5 (also, line 8, lines 9-10, and line 11) and “the secondary actuation device” in lines 5-6 (also, line 10 and lines 11-12); however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by each of “the primary actuation device” and “the secondary actuation device” because the claim fails to previously introduce each of “a primary actuation device” “a secondary actuation devices” Also, it is unclear whether each of “the primary actuation device” in line 5 (also, line 8, lines 9-10, and line 11) and “the secondary actuation device” in lines 5-6 (also, line 10 and lines 11-12) is/are intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in lines 1-2 of the claim and/or “the primary and second actuation devices” which are previously referred to in line 3 of the claim. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim. New claim 10 also introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 9; however, the claim previously introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 2, and it is unclear whether the “hydraulic brake pressure” introduced in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 2. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the aforementioned rejections of claim 10 , one suggestion is to amend claim 10 to instead recite: --A method for operating a power brake system including a primary actuation device for generating a first hydraulic brake pressure, a secondary actuation device for generating a second hydraulic brake pressure, and a braking device to which [[a]] the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation devices device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics, the method comprising the following steps: collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device; and collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining [[a]] the first hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode.-- New claims 11-16 are dependent from claim 10, such that claims 11-16 also include the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 10 and are rejected for at least the same as reasons that claim 10 is rejected. New claim 11 introduces “a braking request signal” in each of line 3 and line 5; however, claim 11 is dependent from claim 10, and claim 10 previously introduces “a braking request signal” in line 3. First, it is unclear whether the “braking request signal” introduced in line 3 of claim 11 is intended to be the same as or different from the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 3 of claim 10. Next, it is unclear whether the “braking request signal” introduced in line 5 of claim 11 is intended to be the same as or different from the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 3 of claim 10 and/or the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 3 of claim 11. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim. New claims 12-15 are dependent from claim 11, such that claims 12-15 also include the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 11 and are rejected for at least the same as reasons that claim 11 is rejected. New claim 12 introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 5; however, claim 12 is dependent from claim 10 via claim 11, and claim 10 twice previously introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 2 and in line 9. Specifically, it is unclear whether the “hydraulic brake pressure” introduced in line 5 of claim 12 is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 2 of claim 10 and/or the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 9 of claim 10. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 14 is dependent from claim 12, such that claim 14 also includes the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 12 and is rejected for at least the same as reasons that claim 12 is rejected. New claim 13 introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 5; however, claim 13 is dependent from claim 10 via claim 11, and claim 10 twice previously introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 2 and in line 9. Specifically, it is unclear whether the “hydraulic brake pressure” introduced in line 5 of claim 13 is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 2 of claim 10 and/or the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 9 of claim 10. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 14 introduces “a received braking request signal” in line 2; however, claim 14 is dependent from claim 10 via claims 11 and 12, claim 10 previously introduces “a braking request signal” in line 3, and claim 11 introduces “a braking request signal” in each of line 3 and line 5. Specifically, it is unclear whether the “braking request signal” introduced in line 2 of claim 14 is intended to be the same as or different from the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 3 of claim 10 and/or the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 3 of claim 11 and/or the “braking request signal” previously introduced in line 5 of claim 11. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 15 introduces “information on the functionality of the primary actuation device” in lines 3-4; however, claim 15 is dependent from claim 10 via claim 11, claim 10 previously introduces “information on functionality of the primary actuation device” in line 5. Specifically, it is unclear whether the “information on the functionality of the primary actuation device” in lines 3-4 of claim 15 is intended to be the same as or different from the “information on functionality of the primary actuation device” previously introduced in line 5 of claim 10. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 15 also refers to “the information” in line 5; however, claim 15 is dependent from claim 10 via claim 11, claim 10 previously introduces each of “information on functionality of the primary actuation device” in line 5 and refers to “the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device” in line 8, and claim 15 previously introduces “information on the functionality of the primary actuation device” in lines 3-4. Specifically, it is unclear whether the “information” in line 5 of claim 15 is intended to be the same as or different from the “information” previously introduced in line 5 of claim 10 and/or the “information” previously referred to in line 8 of claim 10 and/or the “information” previously introduced in lines 3-4 of claim 15. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 17 recites “ the power brake system includes a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned ” in lines 1-3; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “a primary and secondary actuation device,” as it is unclear how a device, such as an “actuation device,” would be both “primary” AND “secondary,” especially in the context of the phrasing “ to which … are assigned ,” which appears to require reference to plural claim elements, and it is unclear whether “a primary and secondary actuation device” is intended to differently introduce -- the power brake system includes a braking device to which a primary actuation device and a secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned for generating respective hydraulic brake pressures --, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, with both of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 serving to generate a hydraulic braking pressure for wheel brakes 8 of a braking device 12, to which each of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 are assigned. New claim 17 also recites “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” in lines 3-4; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the primary and second actuation devices” because the claim fails to previously introduce “primary and second actuation devices.” Also, it is unclear whether the “primary and second actuation devices” referred to in line 3 is intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in line 2 of the claim, and, in the former case, it is unclear whether “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” is a misstating of --the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation device device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics--, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 receiving a braking request signal 18 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, receiving a braking request signal 20, different from the braking request signal 18. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 17 also refers to each of “the primary actuation device” in line 6 (also, line 9, lines 10-11, and line 12) and “the secondary actuation device” in lines 6-7 (also, line 11 and lines 12-13); however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by each of “the primary actuation device” and “the secondary actuation device” because the claim fails to previously introduce each of “a primary actuation device” “a secondary actuation devices” Also, it is unclear whether each of “the primary actuation device” in line 6 (also, line 9, lines 10-11, and line 12) and “the secondary actuation device” in lines 6-7 (also, line 11 and lines 12-13) is/are intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in line 2 of the claim and/or “the primary and second actuation devices” which are previously referred to in line 3 of the claim. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim. New claim 17 also introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 10; however, the claim previously introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in lines 2-3, and it is unclear whether the “hydraulic brake pressure” introduced in line 10 is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in lines 2-3. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the aforementioned rejections of claim 17 , one suggestion is to amend claim 17 to instead recite: --A method for operating a power brake system including a primary actuation device for generating a first hydraulic brake pressure, a secondary actuation device for generating a second hydraulic brake pressure, and a braking device to which [[a]] the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation device device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics, the method comprising the following steps: collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device; and collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining [[a]] the first hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode.-- --A power brake system for a motor vehicle, wherein the power brake system includes a primary actuation device for generating a first hydraulic brake pressure, a secondary actuation device for generating a second hydraulic brake pressure, and a braking device to which [[a]] the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation devices device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics, the power brake system configured to: collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device; and collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining [[a]] the first hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode.-- New claim 18 recites “ a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned ” in lines 2-3; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “a primary and secondary actuation device,” as it is unclear how a device, such as an “actuation device,” would be both “primary” AND “secondary,” especially in the context of the phrasing “ to which … are assigned ,” which appears to require reference to plural claim elements, and it is unclear whether “a primary and secondary actuation device” is intended to differently introduce -- a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary actuation device and a secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned for generating respective hydraulic brake pressures --, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, with both of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 serving to generate a hydraulic braking pressure for wheel brakes 8 of a braking device 12, to which each of the primary actuation device 14 and the secondary actuation device 16 are assigned. New claim 18 also recites “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” in lines 3-5; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the primary and second actuation devices” because the claim fails to previously introduce “primary and second actuation devices.” Also, it is unclear whether the “primary and second actuation devices” referred to in lines 3-4 is intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in lines 2-3 of the claim, and, in the former case, it is unclear whether “ the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” is a misstating of --the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation device device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics--, especially in view of at least Fig. 1 of Applicant’s drawings (see Replacement Sheet filed 07/08/2025) showing each of a primary actuation device 14 receiving a braking request signal 18 and a secondary actuation device 16, different from the primary actuation device 14, receiving a braking request signal 20, different from the braking request signal 18. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. New claim 18 also refers to each of “the primary actuation device” in line 7 (also, lines 10-11, line 12, and line 13) and “the secondary actuation device” in line 8 (also, line 12 and line 14); however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by each of “the primary actuation device” and “the secondary actuation device” because the claim fails to previously introduce each of “a primary actuation device” “a secondary actuation devices” Also, it is unclear whether each of “the primary actuation device” in line 7 (also, lines 10-11, line 12, and line 13) and “the secondary actuation device” in line 8 (also, line 12 and line 14) is/are intended to be the same as or different from “a primary and secondary actuation device” which is previously introduced in lines 2-3 of the claim and/or “the primary and second actuation devices” which are previously referred to in lines 3-4 of the claim. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim. New claim 18 also introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 11; however, the claim previously introduces “a hydraulic brake pressure” in line 3, and it is unclear whether the “hydraulic brake pressure” introduced in line 11 is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydraulic brake pressure” previously introduced in line 3. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the aforementioned rejections of claim 18 , one suggestion is to amend claim 18 to instead recite: --A motor vehicle, comprising: a power brake system including a primary actuation device for generating a first hydraulic brake pressure, a secondary actuation device for generating a second hydraulic brake pressure, and a braking device to which [[a]] the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary actuation device and second the secondary actuation devices device are configured to receive [[a]] respective braking request signal signals that [[is]] are each representative of a braking request by electronics, the power brake system configured to: collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device, and collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining [[a]] the first hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode; wherein the motor vehicle is configured for highly automated or autonomous driving.-- The claim limitation “power brake system,” as applicable to each of the limitations “ collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” in lines 4-8 of claim 17 and lines 5-9 of claim 18 and “ collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” in lines 4-13 of claim 17 and lines 5-14 of claim 18, has been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, but the result is inconclusive. Thus, it is unclear whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the limitation uses the term “system” [which has been held to be a non-structural generic placeholder (or substitute) for the term “means”; e.g., see: MPEP 2181_I_A] together with functional language to modify said “system,” and it is unclear whether “power brake system” is modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing said functional language, especially since the claims fail to establish what element(s) of said “power brake system” are intended to perform said functional language, especially since neither of claims 17 and 18 requires inclusion of the “primary actuation device” and/or the “secondary actuation device” by said “power brake device,” and especially since claims 17 and 18 appear to establish each of the “primary actuation device” and the “secondary actuation device” as an element separate from said “power brake device” via inclusion of “ to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned .” The boundaries of this claim limitation are ambiguous; therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. In response to this rejection, applicant must clarify whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Mere assertion regarding applicant’s intent to invoke or not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is insufficient. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim to clearly invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by reciting “means” or a generic placeholder for means, or by reciting “step.” The “means,” generic placeholder, or “step” must be modified by functional language, and must not be modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function; (b) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, should apply because the claim limitation recites a function to be performed and does not recite sufficient structure, material, or acts to perform that function; (c) Amend the claim to clearly avoid invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by deleting the function or by reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to perform the recited function; or (d) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply because the limitation does not recite a function or does recite a function along with sufficient structure, material or acts to perform that function. 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0122343 to Mehdizade et al. (hereinafter: “Mehdizade”) . With respect to claim 10 , Mehdizade teaches a method for operating a power brake system (e.g., 300) including a braking device (e.g., 126) to which a primary and secondary actuation device (e.g., 322 & 324, respectively) for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned (apparent from at least Figs. 1, 3 & 4) , the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics (e.g., 134) (apparent from at least Figs. 1, 3 & 4 in view of at least ¶ 0034-0035 & 0037-0040) [note: no part of the claimed method requires “ operating ” of the claimed “power brake system” (or an element thereof), such that the preamble recitation “ for operating a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” amounts to nothing more than intended use or purpose of the claimed method that is not germane to patentability of the claim under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.02)] , the method comprising the following steps: collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device; and collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode [the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_II), and claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I), and only one of the steps “ collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” and “ collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” would necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” is either met or not met during performing of the claimed method, as it would be impossible for the step “ collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” to be performed when the condition “ when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” is met during performing of the claimed method, whereas “ collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method when the condition “ when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” is not met during performing of the claimed method; even so, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3-5 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0040, 0050-0051, 0054-0064, 0066-0073 & 0079-0081, electronic communication occurs between the SBM 324 and the PBM 322 over a communication bus 404, including detecting by the SBM 324 that the electronic communication has been received from the PBM 322 over the communication bus 404 in a certain period of time or in response to a request from the SBM 324, at times including when a failure is detected in the PBM 322 and at other times when the PBM 322 is operational in the absence of failure (e.g., “ collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ”); additionally or alternatively, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3-5 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0040, 0050-0051, 0054-0064, 0066-0073 & 0079-0081, the SBM 324 detects a hydraulic pressure pattern, via a pressure sensor 442 of the SBM 324, which encodes a braking profile (or a no braking response) of the PBM 322 (e.g., “ collecting the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device ”) at times including when the SBM 324 detects that there has been a loss of communication with the PBM 322 (e.g., “ when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ”)] . With respect to claim 11 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 10, further comprising the following steps: ascertaining, by the secondary actuation device, whether the secondary actuation device can receive a braking request signal and is functional (as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068) ; putting the braking device into a disruption mode when the secondary actuation device cannot receive a braking request signal but is functional [the step “ putting the braking device into a disruption mode ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when the secondary actuation device cannot receive a braking request signal but is functional ” is not met during performing of the claimed method (e.g., when the secondary actuation device can receive the braking request signal during performing of the claimed method and/or when the secondary actuation device is not functional during performing of the claimed method), such that “ putting the braking device into a disruption mode when the secondary actuation device cannot receive a braking request signal but is functional ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068] ; and automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device when no hydraulic activity of the primary actuation device is ascertained by the secondary actuation device in the second collection mode for a predetermined time period [the step “ automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when no hydraulic activity of the primary actuation device is ascertained by the secondary actuation device in the second collection mode for a predetermined time period ” is not met during performing of the claimed method (e.g., when hydraulic activity of the primary actuation device is ascertained by the secondary actuation device in the second collection mode during performing of the claimed method, or when the step “ putting the braking device into a disruption mode ” is not performed during performing of the claimed method), such that “ automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device when no hydraulic activity of the primary actuation device is ascertained by the secondary actuation device in the second collection mode for a predetermined time period ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068] . With respect to claim 12 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 11, further comprising the following steps: collecting information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device by the primary actuation device, using electronic communication between the secondary and the primary actuation device; and generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period when no information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device can be collected by the primary actuation device [the step “ generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when no information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device can be collected by the primary actuation device ” is not met during performing of the claimed method, such that “ generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period when no information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device can be collected by the primary actuation device ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 4 & 6 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0040, 0050-0051, 0054-0064 & 0074-0081, electronic communication occurs between the SBM 324 and the PBM 322 over the communication bus 404, including detecting by the PBM 322 that the electronic communication has been received from the SBM 324 over the communication bus 404 in a certain period of time or in response to a request from the PBM 322 (e.g., “ collecting information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device by the primary actuation device, using electronic communication between the secondary and the primary actuation device ”); additionally or alternatively, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 4 & 6 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0040, 0050-0051, 0054-0064 & 0074-0081, the PBM 322 generates the hydraulic pressure pattern which encodes the braking profile (or the no braking response) of the PBM 322 as hydraulic pressure pulses that are each individually shorter than a duration of the hydraulic pressure pattern (e.g., “predetermined time period”) (e.g., “ generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period ”) at times including when the PBM 322 detects that there has been a loss of communication with the SBM 324 (e.g., “ when no information on the functionality of the secondary actuation device can be collected by the primary actuation device ”)] . With respect to claim 13 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 11, further comprising the following steps: detecting a mode of the braking device by the primary actuation device, using electronic communication between the primary actuation device and the secondary actuation device (as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068) ; and generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period when the disruption mode is detected [the step “ generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when the disruption mode is detected ” is not met during performing of the claimed method (e.g., when the contingent limitation “ putting the braking device into a disruption mode when the secondary actuation device cannot receive a braking request signal but is functional ” is not performed as part of the claimed method or when the disruption mode is not detected ), such that “ generating a hydraulic brake pressure by the primary actuation device at time intervals that are shorter than the predetermined time period when the disruption mode is detected ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068] . With respect to claim 14 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 12, wherein the hydraulic brake pressure is generated by the primary actuation device either: (i) based on a received braking request signal producing a braking effect, or (ii) for detecting a hydraulic activity by the secondary actuation device (for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064, 0066-0068 & 0081; because the hydraulic brake pressure is generated by the primary actuation device based on a received braking request signal producing a braking effect and the hydraulic brake pressure is generated by the primary actuation device for detecting a hydraulic activity by the secondary actuation device are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives) . With respect to claim 15 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 11, further comprising the following step: automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device when information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode, the information characterizing a non-functionality of the primary actuation device [the step “ automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode, the information characterizing a non-functionality of the primary actuation device ” is not met during performing of the claimed method (e.g., when the alternative step “ collecting information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” is not performed as part of the claimed method or when the information does not characterize a non-functionality of the primary actuation device), such that “ automatically actuating the braking device in the disruption mode by the secondary actuation device when information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode, the information characterizing a non-functionality of the primary actuation device ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0059-0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068] . With respect to claim 16 , Mehdizade teaches the method according to claim 10, further comprising the following steps: monitoring the functionality of the primary actuation device and ascertaining the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device by the primary actuation device (as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068) ; wherein the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is transmitted to the secondary actuation device using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device when the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device characterizes a non-functionality of the primary actuation device [“ wherein the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is transmitted to the secondary actuation device using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device when the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device characterizes a non-functionality of the primary actuation device ” does not necessarily require a further step to be performed as part of the claimed method and does not necessarily further define a previously introduced step of the claimed method, and even if it can be persuasively argued that “ the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is transmitted to the secondary actuation device using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” does, in fact, require a step to be performed as part of the claimed method and/or further define a previously introduced step of the claimed method, “ the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is transmitted to the secondary actuation device using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device ” would not necessarily be performed as part of the claimed method at times including when the condition “ when the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device characterizes a non-functionality of the primary actuation device ” is not met during performing of the claimed method (e.g., when the information does not characterize a non-functionality of the primary actuation device), such that “ wherein the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device is transmitted to the secondary actuation device using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device when the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device characterizes a non-functionality of the primary actuation device ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed method under a broadest reasonable interpretation (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I & 2111.04_II, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0050-0051, 0060, 0062-0064 & 0066-0068] . With respect to claim 17 , Mehdizade teaches a power brake system for a motor vehicle, wherein the power brake system includes a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics, the power brake system configured to: collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device; and collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode [as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10; note: claim scope is not limited by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I), and apparatus claims cover what a device is , not what a device does , and a claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (e.g., see: MPEP 2114_II), and “ to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” neither requires the claimed “power brake system” (nor an element thereof) to include a “primary and secondary actuation device” (or “primary and second actuation devices”) and instead merely sets forth the manner in which the claimed “power brake system” is intended to be used, such that “ to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics ” does not necessarily further limit the claimed “power brake system” under a broadest reasonable interpretation; also, note: “ the power brake system configured to: collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device; and collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode ” merely sets forth functions to be carried out by the “primary actuation device” and the “secondary actuation device,” which are not necessarily included by the claimed “power brake system,” and does not actually set forth any functions to be performed by the claimed “power brake system” (or an element thereof)] . With respect to claim 18 , Mehdizade teaches a motor vehicle (100) , comprising: a power brake system including a braking device to which a primary and secondary actuation device for generating a hydraulic brake pressure are assigned, the primary and second actuation devices configured to receive a braking request signal that is representative of a braking request by electronics, the power brake system configured to: collect information on functionality of the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device in a first collection mode using electronic communication between the primary and the secondary actuation device, and collect the information on the functionality of the primary actuation device in a second collection mode by ascertaining a hydraulic brake pressure generated by the primary actuation device by the secondary actuation device when no information on the functionality of the primary actuation device can be collected by the secondary actuation device in the first collection mode (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 17) ; wherein the motor vehicle is configured for highly automated or autonomous driving (as discussed by at least ¶ 0030; because configured for highly automated driving and configured for autonomous driving are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited form . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN ZALESKAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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. /JOHN M ZALESKAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 2 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 3 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 4 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 5 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 6 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 7 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 9 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 10 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 11 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 12 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 13 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 14 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 15 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 16 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 17 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 18 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 19 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 20 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 21 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 23 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 24 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 25 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 26 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 27 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 28 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 29 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 30 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 31 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 32 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 33 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 34 Art Unit: 3747 Application/Control Number: 19/211,991 Page 35 Art Unit: 3747
Prosecution Insights