Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/363,562

METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND MODULES FOR KEY EXCHANGE IN POINT-TO-MULTIPOINT TRANSPORT NETWORKS

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Aug 01, 2023
Examiner
PALIWAL, YOGESH
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Infinera Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
588 granted / 702 resolved
+25.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
719
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.1%
+5.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 702 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (Claims 1-17) in the reply filed on 12/05/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Drawings Figs. 1-9 are is objected to as depicting a block diagram without "readily identifiable" descriptors of each block, as required by 37 CFR 1.84(n). Rule 84(n) requires "labeled representations" of graphical symbols, such as blocks; and any that are "not universally recognized may be used, subject to approval by the Office, if they are not likely to be confused with existing conventional symbols, and if they are readily identifiable." In the case of Fig. 1-9, the blocks are not readily identifiable per se. Each block should have a corresponding label that identifies its function or purpose. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the fling date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the examiner does not accept the changes, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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(s) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 1 currently recites, A module for a hub network element comprising: “one or more processor-readable media storing…. Therefore, claim is identifying the module with a single component namely “one or more processor-readable media”. The specification does not define the term processor-readable media and it is unclear whether the term is meant to encompass signals or not. The broadest, reasonable interpretation of the term is applied and currently the examiner is assuming that it encompasses signals. Therefore, the module recites claim limitations that are directed to software per se. The claimed system must include the hardware necessary to realize any of the functionality of the claimed system and produce a useful, concrete and tangible result. In absence of any positive recitation of such hardware as part of the claimed system, the claim is considered non-statutory. Examiner suggest applicant to recite “non-transitory processor-readable media” in place of “processor-readable media” to overcome this rejection. Claims 2-10 depend on claim 1 and they also do not incorporate any hardware into the claimed system. 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. Claims 1, 2, 6-12 and 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention lacks patentable utility. Please note that claims 1 and 11 concludes with hub network element sending the partial key message to all leaf network elements and destination network element. Sending the partial key message does not produce useful, concrete, and tangible result and it appears to be only an intermediate step. Claims 2, 6-10, 12 and 16-17 also does not appear to produce useful, concrete, and tangible result. As a result, claims 1, 2, 6-12 and 16-17 lacks patentable utility that is specific, substantial, and credible. See, MPEP § 2107. Note: Claims 3 and 13 appears to be providing the utility as the claims 3 and 13 includes using deriving final partial key after performing various steps and using the final partial key as a shared secret key. 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. Claims 1, 2, 6-12 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. As indicated above, claims 1 and 11 concludes with hub network element sending the partial key message to all leaf network elements and destination network element. Sending the partial key message does not produce useful, concrete, and tangible result and it appears to be only an intermediate step. Claims 2, 6-10, 12 and 16-17 also does not appear to produce essential step in order to produce useful, concrete and tangible result. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: steps claimed in claims 2, 3, 12 and 13 which results in deriving final partial key which is designated as a shared secret key. Correction/Clarification is required. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 6-12 and 16-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action. Claims 3-5 and 13-15 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yuan et al. (US 11,196,550 B2). Hassan et al. (US 2019/0044712 A1). Pillai et al. (US 2017/0034137 A1). Sun et al. (US 2016/0134600 A1). Blom et al. (US 7,987,366 B2). Martin et al. (US 2003/0177358 A1). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOGESH PALIWAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM. 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, Joseph P Hirl can be reached at 5712723685. 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. /YOGESH PALIWAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 01, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603763
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENSURING EPHEMERALITY OF ENCRYPTION KEYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596838
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PERFORMING TABLE QUESTION-ANSWERING TASKS WHILE PRESERVING DATA SECURITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592819
MEMBERSHIP ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT USING A CONTACTLESS CARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587389
Quantum Resistant Identity Sharing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580740
ACCESS CONTROL USING MEDIATED LOCATION, ATTRIBUTE, POLICY, AND PURPOSE VERIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 702 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