Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/316,787

OBJECT REFERENCE WITH SELECTABLE SCOPE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
May 12, 2023
Examiner
DADA, BEEMNET W
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Snowflake Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
789 granted / 933 resolved
+24.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
944
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§103
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 933 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/12/2023 and 02/28/2024 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Form PTO-1449 is signed and attached hereto. Drawings The drawings filed on May 12, 2023 are accepted. Specification The specification filed May 12, 2023 is accepted. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-6, 9, 11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dasari et al. US 2021/0377276 A1 [hereinafter Dasari]. As per claims 1, 17 and 19 Dasari teaches a system comprising: at least one hardware processor [figure 1]; and at least one memory storing instructions that cause the at least one hardware processor to execute operations comprising: calling, by a first entity, a reference generator function using one or more arguments associated with a database object that the first entity is authorized to access according to a first set of access privileges, the one or more arguments comprising a scope definition that defines persistence of a reference [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091]; obtaining, from the reference generator function, a reference to the database object, the reference persisting according to the scope definition [paragraphs 00781, 0080, 0087-0091]; and passing the reference to a second entity to enable the second entity to perform one or more database operations on the database object according to a second set of access privileges derived from the first set of access privileges [paragraphs 0126-0131]. As per claims 2, 18 and 20, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the database object comprises a table, an external table, a stream, a view, a materialized view, a warehouse, an application programming interface integration, a notification integration, or a function [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 3, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the first entity comprises a producer or caller process and the second entity comprises a consumer process [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 4, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the database object is accessed by the second entity as a role of the first entity [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 5, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the one or more arguments comprise the second set of access privileges as a subset of the first set of access privileges, the second set of access privileges including at least one or more fewer access privileges than the first set of access privileges [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 6, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the operations further comprise: executing an application or instance by the first entity on a database server; and calling the reference generator function as part of the application or instance, wherein the one or more arguments comprise an identifier of the database object including a domain of the database object [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 9, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the scope definition defines the reference as a session reference, and wherein the operations further comprise temporarily authorizing the second entity to access the object using the reference during an established session between the first and second entities [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 11, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the scope definition defines the reference as a persistent reference with an unlimited life span until removed by the first entity [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 13, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the operations further comprise: presenting, to the first entity, access history associated with the database object, the access history representing operations performed on the database object using the reference [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 14, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the operations comprise at least one of INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, and COPY operations [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 15, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the access history represents a history of instance or application queries associated with the database object accessed using the reference [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. As per claim 16, Dasari further teaches the system wherein the access history comprises at least one of a query identifier, a query start time, a username, one or more database objects accessed, or one or more database objects modified [paragraphs 0078, 0080, 0087-0091 and 0126-0131]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7, 8, 10 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEEMNET W DADA whose telephone number is (571)272-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm. 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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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. BEEMNET W. DADA Primary Examiner Art Unit 2435 /BEEMNET W DADA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 12, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12705358
TIME-WINDOW BASED MULTI-STAGE SAMPLING
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12699775
ACHIEVING MINIMUM TRUSTWORTHINESS IN DISTRIBUTED WORKLOADS
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12701137
USING IMAGES GENERATED FROM NETWORK PACKETS TO IDENTIFY APPLICATIONS
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12699767
VIRTUALIZATION-BASED TRUSTED COMPUTING MEASUREMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12694114
COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SCORING AND MANAGING DIGITAL CONTENT
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.4%)
2y 12m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 933 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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