Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/361,576

Hardware Pairing Communication for Streaming Service

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 28, 2023
Priority
Jul 29, 2022 — provisional 63/369,860
Examiner
LEE, PHILIP C
Art Unit
2454
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Apple Inc.
OA Round
6 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
242 granted / 313 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
331
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
85.0%
+45.0% vs TC avg
§102
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§112
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 313 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 . Claims 1-4, 8-12 and 16-23 have been examined. Response to Argument Applicant’s arguments, on pages 6-9, filed 3/17/26, with respect to the rejection under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 1-4, 8-12 and 16-20 have been withdrawn.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. Claims 1-4, 8-12 and 16-23 are 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In specific, independent claims 1 and 17 recite “during a pairing process associated with the pair request, transmit an indication to the service system that the access to the service has been initiated”, and claim 9 recites “during a pairing process associated with the pair request, transmitting an indication to the service system that the access to the service has been initiated”. According to paragraphs 26 and 27 of Applicant’s specification, steps of figure 3 discloses a connection request including a pair process but does not disclose transmitting an acceptance/indication that the access to the service has been initiated to the service system during this pair process. Paragraph 50 of Application’s specification discloses steps of figure 6 including acceptance data is transmitted to the service system, but does not disclose the acceptance data is transmitted during a pair process. Applicant’s specification, at the time the application was filed, does not have support for the limitation. Thus, these claims fail the written description requirement. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Philip Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-3967. The examiner can normally be reached on 6a-3p M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Glenton Burgess can be reached on 571-272-3949. 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. /PHILIP C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 8 earlier events
Jul 25, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Nov 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Mar 16, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 16, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 17, 2026
Response Filed
May 28, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683886
GENERATING NETWORK SCENARIOS TO TRAIN AN LLM-BASED NETWORK TROUBLESHOOTING AGENT
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12665805
TECHNIQUE FOR SETTING A DECISION THRESHOLD OF A COMMUNICATION NETWORK ANALYTICS SYSTEM
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12659247
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12659248
Distributed System and Distributed Device Which Constitutes Distributed System
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12652229
Load Balancing Between Multiple Traffic Flows using a Parameter
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+19.3%)
3y 1m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 313 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