Answering one aspect of the question - the step or element left out of a product to avoid infringe a claims does not need to be a novel step. Claims are novel and non-obvious as a whole and leaving out any positively claimed element avoids literal infringement.
There is a claim format (Jepson or two-part) often used in the rest of the world but rarely ...
Similar questions abound on this site. For the first question:
For a random example, imagine that a technology/device patent claim
for generating some image provides a method consisting of 5 steps. The
first step is that the light used in generating said image must have a
power of around 8100 to 8500 (just random, unitless numbers). Let's
say I ...
This is very basic patent information that is duplicated in many previous answers.
Each claim stands alone as something that defines a device, system or method that would constitute infringement. A product might infringe one or more claims of a patent. Infringing one claim is infringing the patent.
To infringe a claim a product must contain all of the ...
It depends on your claims that end up being granted. You can file an application with both claims to the component and to claims to the modified whole system. It may be that your component is a particularly shaped cam and it makes the whole device unique. But the cam itself, sitting on a shelf, out of context, might not be new. If you have a claim to the ...
It isn't the wording of a claim that would be the clearest expression of the meaning of a reference. The wording of a claim is most relevant to determining if something infringed. In your case the claim never appeared in a granted patent so that is moot
To show that you invention is not novel, it (as claimed in your application) needs to be found described ...
It’s important to focus on the claims to determine if your technique would infringe in these applications. Looking at the first claim of the earlier submission:
A tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable medium storing instructions that when executed by one or more
processors effectuate operations comprising: receiving, with one or
I see the date on your article as 11.03.2019. If the date is in the form month.date.year, it was after both applications.
The application that US2020012817 was filed August 8 2019, so before November 3rd 2019. The other application was filed in 2018, so your article was not prior to it either.