Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 15/702,102

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING SERVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 12, 2017
Examiner
TRUONG, THONG P
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Comcast Cable Communications LLC
OA Round
9 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
9-10
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
402 granted / 489 resolved
+24.2% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
507
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 489 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/21/2025 has been entered. 2. Claims 2-4, 6-9, 11-16, 18-21 and 23-25 are pending. Claims 2, 8, and 15 are independent and currently amended. Claims 1, 5, 10, 17 and 22 are canceled. Claim 25 is new. Amendments to the claims have been entered. Response to Arguments 3. Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered; however, they are not persuasive based on new ground(s) of rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 4. 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. 5. Claims 2-4, 6, 7, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gooch (US PG Pub. 2009/0006575) in view of Waters (US PG Pub. 2010/0017794). As regarding claim 2, Gooch discloses A method, comprising: based on a user device sending, to a third-party website, a device identifier associated with the user device, causing a determination, by the third-party website and based on the device identifier, of a service identifier that indicates a server associated with a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device [para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]; and receiving, by the user device and from the third-party website, the service identifier, wherein the service provider is associated with the user device [para. 62-63; the client receiving address of the remediation server]. Gooch does not explicitly disclose that a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device and is distinct from the third-party website; however, Waters discloses it [FIG.1 and para. 5-8; a company, e.g. customer 202, is another entity that provides network connectivity to the IT personnel’s device and is different from a third-party service provider]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Gooch’s service provider to further comprise a company that is distinct from the third-party website, as disclosed by Waters,in order to efficiently and securely apply, by the third-party, patches and updates to the company's platform and to save company’s cost [Waters para. 9]. As regarding claim 3, Gooch and Waters further disclose The method of claim 2, wherein the device identifier comprises information indicating one or more of a manufacturer, a model, a type of device, and a class of the user device [Gooch para. 37; first six characters of MAC address identifying the manufacture], the method further comprising causing a determination, by the third-party website and based on a user identifier associated with the user device, the service identifier [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client, determining IP address of the of the remote remediation server]. As regarding claim 4, Gooch and Waters further disclose The method of claim 2, wherein the service identifier comprises a uniform resource locator of the server associated with the service provider [Gooch para. 62-63; web site names, e.g. http://www.hp.com, master.remediation.hp.com, rs1.remediation.hp.com, etc…]. As regarding claim 6, Gooch and Waters further disclose The method of claim 2, further comprising based on sending the device identifier, causing, based on the device identifier, a determination by the third-party website of an address element associated with the user device, wherein the address element comprises one or more of an internet protocol address, a network address, or an internet address [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; MAC address]. As regarding claim 7, Gooch and Waters further disclose The method of claim 2, further comprising receiving, based on the service identifier, data directing the user device to a service location [Gooch para. 62-63; the client receiving address of the remediation server]. As regarding claim 23, Gooch and Waters further disclose further disclose The method of claim 2, further comprising accessing, by the user device, the third-party website, wherein accessing the third-party website causes a detection, by the third-party website, of a compromised state of the user device [Gooch para. 31 and 58; identifying the client to be non-compliant]. As regarding claim 24, Gooch and Waters further disclose further disclose The method of claim 2, further comprising causing a determination, by the third-party website and based on the device identifier, of the service provider, wherein the service provider is determined from a plurality of service providers [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]. 6. Claims 8, 9, 11-16, 18-21 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gooch (US PG Pub. 2009/0006575) in view of Stern (US PG Pub. 2011/0265116) and further in view of Waters (US PG Pub. 2010/0017794). As regarding claim 8, Gooch discloses A method, comprising: based on a user device sending, to a third-party website, a [device] identifier associated with the user device, causing a determination, by the third-party website and based on the [device] identifier, of a remediation service identifier that indicates a server associated with a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device [para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]; Gooch does not explicitly disclose the device identifier comprising a user identifier; however, Stern discloses it [para. 16]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Gooch’s device identifier to further comprise a user identifier, as disclosed by Stern,as an alternative client identifier that is used for determining network service. Gooch and Stern further disclose receiving, by the user device and from the third-party website, the remediation service identifier, wherein the service provider is associated with the user device [Gooch para. 62-63; the client receiving address of the remediation server]. Gooch and Stern do not explicitly disclose that a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device and is distinct from the third-party website; however, Waters discloses it [FIG.1 and para. 5-8; a company, e.g. customer 202, is another entity that provides network connectivity to the IT personnel’s device and is different from a third-party service provider]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Gooch and Stern’s service provider to further comprise a company that is distinct from the third-party website, as disclosed by Waters,in order to efficiently and securely apply, by the third-party, patches and updates to the company's platform and to save company’s cost [Waters para. 9]. As regarding claim 9, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, wherein the user identifier comprises an internet protocol address [Stern para. 139; the MAC or IP address of the requesting device]. As regarding claim 11, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, wherein the remediation service identifier comprises a uniform resource locator associated with an online remediation service [Gooch para. 62-63; web site names, e.g. http://www.hp.com, master.remediation.hp.com, rs1.remediation.hp.com, etc…]. As regarding claim 12, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, wherein the remediation service identifier is stored by a domain name system server [Gooch para. 62; remediation server identifiers, to be resolved to an IP address, are stored by a DNS server]. As regarding claim 13, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, further comprising based on sending the user identifier, causing, based on the user identifier, a determination by the third-party website of an address element associated with the user device, wherein the address element comprises one or more of an internet protocol address, a network address, or an internet address [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; MAC address]. As regarding claim 14, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, further comprising receiving, based on the remediation service identifier, data directing the user device to a remediation service [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]. As regarding claim 15, Gooch discloses An apparatus comprising: one or more processors [para. 14, 22, 26 and 29]; and a memory comprising processor-executable instructions [para. 87] that, when executed by the one or more processors [para. 22, 26 and 29], cause the apparatus to: based on sending a [device] identifier associated with the apparatus to a third-party website, cause a determination, by the third-party website and based on the [device] identifier, of a remediation service identifier that indicates a server associated with a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device [para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]; Gooch does not explicitly disclose the device identifier comprising a user identifier; however, Stern discloses it [para. 16]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Gooch’s device identifier to further comprise a user identifier, as disclosed by Stern,as an alternative client identifier that is used for determining network service. Gooch and Stern further disclose receive, from the third-party website, the remediation service identifier, wherein the service provider is associated with the apparatus [Gooch para. 62-63; the client receiving address of the remediation server]. Gooch and Stern do not explicitly disclose that a service provider that provides network connectivity to the user device and is distinct from the third-party website; however, Waters discloses it [FIG.1 and para. 5-8; a company, e.g. customer 202, is another entity that provides network connectivity to the IT personnel’s device and is different from a third-party service provider]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Gooch and Stern’s service provider to further comprise a company that is distinct from the third-party website, as disclosed by Waters,in order to efficiently and securely apply, by the third-party, patches and updates to the company's platform and to save company’s cost [Waters para. 9]. As regarding claim 16, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the user identifier comprises an internet protocol address [Stern para. 139; the MAC or IP address of the requesting device]. As regarding claim 18, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the remediation service identifier comprises a uniform resource locator associated with an online remediation service [Gooch para. 62-63; web site names, e.g. http://www.hp.com, master.remediation.hp.com, rs1.remediation.hp.com, etc…]. As regarding claim 19, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the remediation service identifier is stored by a domain name system server [Gooch para. 62; remediation server identifiers, to be resolved to an IP address, are stored by a DNS server]. As regarding claim 20, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The apparatus of claim 15, further comprising based on sending the device identifier, causing, based on the device identifier, a determination by the third party website of an address element associated with the apparatus, wherein the address element comprises one or more of an internet protocol address, a network address, or an internet address [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; MAC address]. As regarding claim 21, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the apparatus to receive, based on the remediation service identifier, data directing the apparatus to a remediation service [Gooch para. 23, 63 and 66-67; based on a client device sending, to a third party vendor supplying remediation functionality, the MAC address of the client to determine the name of the remote remediation server]. As regarding claim 25, Gooch, Stern and Waters further disclose The method of claim 8, further comprising accessing, by the user device, the third-party website, wherein accessing the third-party website causes a detection, by the third-party website, of a compromised state of the user device [Gooch para. 31 and 58; identifying the client to be non-compliant]. CONCLUSION Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THONG P TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7905. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30AM - 5:30PM. 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached on 5712726798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /THONG P TRUONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2433 /JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2017
Application Filed
Jul 08, 2018
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 12, 2018
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2019
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 04, 2019
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 08, 2019
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 27, 2019
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 02, 2020
Response Filed
Mar 23, 2020
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 26, 2020
Notice of Allowance
Aug 26, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 15, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 27, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 17, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 14, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 22, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 22, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
May 10, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 14, 2022
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 27, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 09, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 25, 2022
Interview Requested
Dec 02, 2022
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 05, 2022
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 17, 2023
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 23, 2023
Interview Requested
May 01, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
May 01, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 03, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 05, 2023
Notice of Allowance
Jun 05, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 15, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 05, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 13, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 29, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 26, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 05, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 06, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 13, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 11, 2024
Interview Requested
Nov 19, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 19, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 19, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 04, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 11, 2025
Interview Requested
Mar 19, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 19, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 21, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Aug 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598210
APPARATUS AND METHOD TO MITIGATE MALICIOUS CALLS IN A WIRELESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587567
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS FOR IMPLEMENTING HONEYPOT CONTROL SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569613
SYSTEM, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR PROVIDING ACCESS TO FLUID INJECTION SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12556528
APPLICATION USER SINGLE SIGN-ON
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12543040
CONTINUOUS AUTHENTICATION OF PEERS IN NETWORKS USING POST-QUANTUM PRE-SHARED KEYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

9-10
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+15.1%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 489 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month