Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/057,382

FILE ACCESS BASED ON DIGITAL PRECENSE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 21, 2022
Examiner
TRUONG, THONG P
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/29/2026 has been entered. 2. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 8 and 15 are independent. No claims have been amended at this time. Response to Arguments 3. Applicant's responses to the Final Office Action dated 10/29/2025 have been addressed in the Advisory Action dated 12/31/2025. 4. Applicant's arguments in responding to the Advisory Action dated 12/31/2025 have been fully considered; however, they are not persuasive. In responding to Applicant’s arguments “Applicant respectfully disagrees with [this stated] motivation to combine the references because it is not apparent that allowing an environment in which a plurality of users can directly and concurrently interact with each other would make the system more efficient by giving users access to desired files,” Examiners respectfully disagree. Hart discloses an environment in which the users are interacting with each other to access and share files [FIG. 1, col. 4 lines 1-17 and col. 8 lines 46-55]. In Hart, files are shared among users via directories and folders [col. 2 lines 46-64], e.g. a user may access, write to a file and then store it in a folder and another user may access the file from the folder. Thus, the users are not directly and currently sharing files. Therefore, modifying Hart's interactive environment to further include Harrington's interactive environment in which data or files may be exchanged directly and concurrently among users would cure the claim deficiency. The benefits of such modification would be to make the system more efficient by giving users immediate access to the desired files upon request in such interactive environment. In responding to Applicant’s argument “the reference is completely silent with regard to the claimed requirement that the data gathering includes "data about a level of participation of a first user in the user interactive environment during a period of time when the first user and one or more other users are present together in the user interactive environment." There is no discussion in Hart about the data gathering (i.e., records of file access) being limited to times when users are present together in an interactive environment,” Examiners respectfully disagree. Hart discloses that the system receiving or gathering data about file system including data associated with user's activities [col. 3, lines 13-47 and col. 6, lines 51-66] in an user interactive environment in which users are interacting with each other to access and share files [FIG. 1, col. 4 lines 1-17 and col. 8 lines 46-55]. The data associated with the user's activities including file access permission assigned to users in different departments when the users are participated in the user interactive environment. Thus, Hart's receiving or gathering data about file system including data associated with file access permission assigned to users when the user are participated in the user interactive environment is the same as "gathering data about the collaborative networked environment, including data about a level of participation of a first user in the user interactive environment during a period of time when the first user and one or more other users are present together in the user interactive environment" as recited the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5. 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 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. 7. 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. 7. Claims 1-4, 8-11 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US Patent 10,152,530) in view of Harrington (US Patent 8,881,181). As regarding claim 1, Hart discloses A processor-implemented method, the method comprising: identifying a collaborative networked environment, wherein the collaborative networked environment includes a user interactive environment and a file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including users and file storage] and [FIG. 1, col. 6 line 64 thru col. 7 line 3; a network environment in which users may interact with each other by sharing files and folders that store the shared files]; gathering data about the collaborative networked environment, including data about a level of participation of a first user in the user interactive environment during a period of time when the first user and one or more other users are present together in the user interactive environment [col. 3, lines 13-47 and col. 6, lines 51-66; gathering data about file system including data associated with user’s activities]; and determining access for the one or more users to a resource in the file repository based on the gathered data [col. 6 lines 15-41; determining access of folders for the user] and [col. 6, lines 51-62]. Hart does not explicitly disclose the user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication service. However, Harrington discloses it [col. 6 lines 16-29 and col. 7 lines 39-59; directly and currently interactive virtual environment]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Hart’s user interactive environment to further comprise a user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication, as disclosed by Harrington, in order to provide real-time interactive environment for participated users [col. 5 lines 31-38]. As regarding claim 2, Hart further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the determined access is provided as a recommendation to an administrative user [col. 3 lines 23-36 and col. 6 lines 51-66; user access recommended to the administrator]. As regarding claim 3, Harrington further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the electronic communication service includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a web conference, a voice call, a video call, a live stream, a chat group, or a social media group [col. 6 lines 16-29; chat group or social media group]. As regarding claim 4, Hart further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the collaborative networked environment establishes a connection between the user interactive environment and the file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including connection between users and file storage]. As regarding claim 8, Hart discloses A computer system, the computer system comprising: one or more processors, one or more computer-readable memories, one or more computer-readable tangible storage medium, and program instructions stored on at least one of the one or more tangible storage medium for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories [col. 12 lines 35-49], wherein the computer system is capable of performing a method comprising: identifying a collaborative networked environment, wherein the collaborative networked environment includes a user interactive environment and a file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including users and file storage] and [FIG. 1, col. 6 line 64 thru col. 7 line 3; a network environment in which users may interact with each other by sharing files and folders that store the shared files]; gathering data about the collaborative networked environment, including data about a level of participation of a first user in the user interactive environment during a period of time when the first user and one or more other users are present together in the user interactive environment [col. 3 lines 13-47 and col. 6 lines 51-66; gathering data about file system including data associated with user’s activities] and [col. 6, lines 51-62]; and determining access for the one or more users to a resource in the file repository based on the gathered data [col. 6 lines 15-41; determining access of folders for the user] and [col. 6, lines 51-62]. Hart does not explicitly disclose the user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication service. However, Harrington discloses it [col. 6 lines 16-29 and col. 7 lines 39-59; directly and currently interactive virtual environment]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Hart’s user interactive environment to further comprise a user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication, as disclosed by Harrington, in order to provide real-time interactive environment for participated users [col. 5 lines 31-38]. As regarding claim 9, Hart further discloses The computer system of claim 8, wherein the determined access is provided as a recommendation to an administrative user [col. 3 lines 23-36 and col. 6 lines 51-66; user access recommended to the administrator]. As regarding claim 10, Harrington further discloses The computer system of claim 8, wherein the electronic communication service includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a web conference, a voice call, a video call, a live stream, a chat group, or a social media group [col. 6 lines 16-29; chat group or social media group]. As regarding claim 11, Hart further discloses The computer system of claim 8, wherein the collaborative networked environment establishes a connection between the user interactive environment and the file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including connection between users and file storage]. As regarding claim 15, Hart discloses A computer program product, the computer program product comprising: one or more computer-readable tangible storage medium and program instructions stored on at least one of the one or more tangible storage medium, the program instructions executable by a processor capable of performing a method [col. 12 lines 35-49], the method comprising: identifying a collaborative networked environment, wherein the collaborative networked environment includes a user interactive environment and a file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including users and file storage] and [FIG. 1, col. 6 line 64 thru col. 7 line 3; a network environment in which users may interact with each other by sharing files and folders that store the shared files]; gathering data about the collaborative networked environment, including data about a level of participation of a first user in the user interactive environment during a period of time when the first user and one or more other users are present together in the user interactive environment [col. 3 lines 13-47 and col. 6 lines 51-66; gathering data about file system including data associated with user’s activities] and [col. 6, lines 51-62]; and determining access for the one or more users to a resource in the file repository based on the gathered data [col. 6 lines 15-41; determining access of folders for the user] and [col. 6, lines 51-62]. Hart does not explicitly disclose the user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication service. However, Harrington discloses it [col. 6 lines 16-29 and col. 7 lines 39-59; directly and currently interactive virtual environment]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Hart’s user interactive environment to further comprise a user interactive environment enabling a plurality of users to directly and concurrently interact with each other through at least one electronic communication service including an audio, video or text-based communication, as disclosed by Harrington, in order to provide real-time interactive environment for participated users [col. 5 lines 31-38]. As regarding claim 16, Hart further discloses The computer program product of claim 15, wherein the determined access is provided as a recommendation to an administrative user [col. 3 lines 23-36 and col. 6 lines 51-66; user access recommended to the administrator]. As regarding claim 17, Harrington further discloses The computer program product of claim 15, wherein the electronic communication service includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a web conference, a voice call, a video call, a live stream, a chat group, or a social media group [col. 6 lines 16-29; chat group or social media group]. As regarding claim 18, Hart further discloses The computer program product of claim 15, wherein the collaborative networked environment establishes a connection between the user interactive environment and the file repository [FIG. 1 and col. 3 line 58 thru col. 4 line 39; network file system including connection between users and file storage]. 8. Claims 5-7, 12-14, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hart (US Patent 10,152,530) in view of Harrington (US Patent 8,881,181) and further in view of Byrnes (US PG Pub. 2012/0191500). As regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, Hart and Harrington do not disclose that the user interactive environment is a digital meeting. However, Byrnes discloses it [FIG. 1 and para. 20]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing of the invention to modify Hart and Harrington’s user interactive environment to further comprise a digital meeting environment, as disclosed by Byrnes, in order to allow meeting attendees to meet online instead of being physically present at a specific location. As regarding claims 6, 13 and 20, Byrnes further discloses the resource is a record of the meeting in the form of meeting minutes or a recording of the meeting [para. 48; meeting record including meeting minutes]. As regarding claims 7 and 14, Byrnes further discloses The method of claim 5, wherein the resource is a digital credential indicating that the user attended the meeting [para. 27 and 31; meeting record including meeting attendance]. 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 57127267986798. 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 TRUONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2433 /JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 21, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 06, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 05, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 05, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 09, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 18, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 18, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 29, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 16, 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

5-6
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