Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/288,814

METHOD FOR REMOTE MANAGEMENT OF COUNTER SERVICES AND RELATED WEB PLATFORM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 29, 2023
Examiner
LOFTIS, JOHNNA RONEE
Art Unit
3625
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Innovation Development Advanced Solutions - | De A S S R L
OA Round
2 (Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 4m
To Grant
48%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allow Rate
216 granted / 499 resolved
-8.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 4m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
533
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§103
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
§102
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 499 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the rejection under 35 USC 112(a) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. While the claim has been amended, to recite “the operator of each counter or office of said plurality of counters or offices to control said second camera for the autonomous acquisition of said images and/or videos”, there is no description of “autonomous” acquisition in the specification. The specification does not mention the word “autonomous”. Autonomous is defined as “able to carry out tasks and adapt to new information without direct human guidance or intervention” (Merriam-Webster). The specification and Applicant remarks describes at [0065], [0069] and pg6 of the remarks, “the API sends the control command to the user device, allowing the operator to remotely initiate the capture of the document image” (emphasis added). This conflicts with the definition of autonomous. Amended claim 9 is rejected under 35 USC 112. The rejection of claim 8 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn in response to cancellation of the claim. The rejection of claim 17 under 35 USC 112(b) has been upheld and updated to claim 9. The claim recites “the autonomous acquisition”. There is no antecedent basis for the term. The claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of autonomous acquisition Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejection has been withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claim recites “allowing the operator… to control said second camera for the autonomous acquisition of said images and/or videos. The specification clearly states the operator controls the various functions directly through the management system [0067] and the operator of the web desk, having to acquire the documents…, when the shot is clear, he/her will take a photo…” [0069]. There is no disclosure of autonomous acquisition of said images and/or videos. 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 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 9 recites "the autonomous acquisition”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Allowable Subject Matter As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the cite prior art taken alone or in combination specifically disclose the claimed features of communication devices (U1, U2, U3) are provided with means for the acquisition of images and videos comprising a first camera suitable for allowing user identification and a second camera for acquisition of images and/or videos of documents wherein said CRM functions are interfaced with the web portal through A.P.I. web sites for allowing the operator of each counter or office of said plurality of counters or offices (OP1, OP2, OP3) to control said second camera for the autonomous acquisition of said images and/or videos. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pertinent prior art is included in the attached PTO-892. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHNNA LOFTIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6736. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-3:30pm. 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, Brian Epstein can be reached at 571-270-5389. 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. JOHNNA LOFTIS Primary Examiner Art Unit 3625 /JOHNNA R LOFTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 29, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 14, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591824
Machine Learning-Driven User Profile Updates For Job Matching
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586019
WORKFLOW MANAGEMENT METHOD, SYSTEM AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT WITH REAL TIME LOG, DEBUG AND RESUME FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12506735
Methods and System for Employee Monitoring and Business Rule and Quorum Compliance Monitoring
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12481941
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR TASK EXECUTION IN A WORKPLACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12412184
PHYSICAL PRODUCT INTERACTION BASED SESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 09, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
43%
Grant Probability
48%
With Interview (+4.2%)
4y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 499 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