During the Third-Party Preissuance Submission under 37 CFR 1.290 one can submit prior art documents together with Concise Description of Relevance explaining relevance of said document. To what level can arguments be revealed in description to not violate restrictions (see below)?
The concise description must not include arguments against patentability or set forth conclusions regarding whether one or more claims are patentable, and must not include proposed rejections of the claims or arguments relating to an Office action or an applicant’s reply in the application.
In other words would it be ok to submit a list of corresponding concepts in both patent application and a prior art document in a way that clearly demonstrates the scope of the claims covered by the prior art? Or even to submit Concise Description of Relevance as a separate document containing detailed analysis of the concepts used in patent application and in prior art together with explanation of why omitted elements are obvious to one skilled in art? Wouldn't it be treated as arguments against patentability which is not allowed?