Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/673,844

Method and System to Generate Personalized Digital Code from Unique Genome Pattern for Use in Identification and Application on Blockchain

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Feb 17, 2022
Examiner
RIGGS II, LARRY D
Art Unit
1686
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
222 granted / 474 resolved
-13.2% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+30.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
491
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§103
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§102
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 474 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Status of the Claims Claim 1 is pending. Drawings The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code, and case QR codes (see Figures 8, 10 and 11). Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1 of Claim 1, “to using set” should read “of using a set”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 1 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim (i.e. claim 1 depends upon itself). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 1 has not been further treated on the merits. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim 1 is rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The claim is narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. Each claim must be in one sentence form only. The paragraphs under claim 1 are improperly formatted and not numbered. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationship is the “system.” Claim 1 recites “methods and systems” but does not describe a process/steps or a tangible system that can execute the steps. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter (Step 1). The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because Applicant attempts to claim a process without setting forth any steps involved. “Use” claims do not purport to claim a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter and therefore fail to comply with 35 U.S.C. 101 [see MPEP 2173.05(q)]. Therefore, claim 1 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C 101. Relevant Prior Art Though claim 1 is not examined on the merits due to the above 112 and 101 rejections, relevant prior art include: Garafutdinov et al., “A new digital approach to SNP encoding for DNA identification,” December 2020, Forensic Science International, Vol. 317, and Javed et al., “Health-ID: A Blockchain-Based Decentralized Identity Management for Remote Healthcare,” June 2021, Healthcare, 9, 712. Garafutdinov teaches assigning a unique genetic identification number (GIN) to each person, and where each SNP is presented and then digitized as a 4-bit box (for each nucleotide letter) and further assigned binary codes. Garafutdinov also discusses that “Given that tetra-allelic SNPs are almost bi-allelic due to very low frequencies of the third and fourth alleles, DNA identification should be based on the larger number of SNPs. The diversity of allele frequencies around the world must also be considered. In general, any SNPs (bi, tri-, or tetra-allelic) can be utilized to create a GIN (see page 3, col. 2, para 4, lines 12-17). Javed teaches a blockchain-based decentralized identity management system that allows patients and healthcare providers to identify and authenticate themselves transparently and securely across different eHealth domains (see abstract). Conclusion No claims allowed. Inquiries Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRITHIKA R KARUNAKARAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5527. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am – 6pm EST. 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, Larry D Riggs can be reached at (571) 270-3062. 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. /KRITHIKA R KARUNAKARAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1686 /LARRY D RIGGS II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1686
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 17, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 10482992
GENOME BROWSER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 19, 2019
Patent 10478556
PROBABILITY BASED CONTROLLER GAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 19, 2019
Patent 10478557
PERSONALIZED PARAMETER MODELING METHODS AND RELATED DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 19, 2019
Patent 10475525
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PREDICTING MISFOLDED PROTEIN EPITOPES
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 12, 2019
Patent 10458973
HANDHELD DIABETES MANAGEMENT DEVICE WITH BOLUS CALCULATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 29, 2019
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+30.9%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 474 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month