Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/373,731

METHODS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF A DEVICE USER BASED ON A USER-RELATED METRICS ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMS THEREOF

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, DUSTIN
Art Unit
2446
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
F5, INC.
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
630 granted / 805 resolved
+20.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
845
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.7%
-31.3% vs TC avg
§103
50.1%
+10.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 805 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are presented for consideration Claim Objections Claims 7-10, and 17-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: “The device” should be corrected as “The network traffic management device” Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dutt et al. [ US Patent Application No 2014/0337243 ]. 4. As per claim 1, Dutt discloses the invention as claimed including a method implemented by a network traffic management system comprising one or more host devices, server devices, network traffic management devices, or client devices the method [ i.e. network communications system ] [ Figure 1; and paragraphs 0036, and 0037 ] comprising: retrieving, in response to a received request requiring identification of a client, user profile data associated with a user at the client [ i.e. the information obtained from the performance of the one or more kinetic motions correlated with contextual information such as that obtained from non-kinetic sensors and other sources to provide more information to make accurate authentication decisions ] [ paragraphs 0067-0073 ]; calculating a user confidence score based on a determined baseline user profile score for the user at the client based on prior values associated with metrics in one or more categories obtained from the retrieved user profile data [ i.e. observed past performance of these motions ] [ paragraph 0064 ] and a determined current user profile score for the user at the client based on current values associated with metrics in one or more categories obtained from the retrieved user profile data [ i.e. each of the characteristics has a dynamic weighting such, based on circumstance such that the weighting may change in the calculation with respect to pre-defined rules, and characteristics include the velocity of the user device, characteristic of environment, biometric, behaviors ] [ paragraphs 0062-0068, 0160 and 0161 ]; comparing the calculated user confidence score against a stored threshold range comprising minimum and maximum confidence threshold scores [ i.e. compare said stored information with a stored user profile, and the score is below a threshold because the performance of the one or more kinetic motions did not fall within certain bounds ] [ Abstract; and paragraphs 0012, 0065, 0086, and 0088 ]; and executing an action with respect to the user at the client in response to the received request based on the comparison of the calculated user confidence score against the stored threshold range [ i.e. a request is sent to a user device ] [ paragraphs 0140, 0190, and 0224 ]. 5. As per claim 3, Dutt discloses wherein the categories comprise a human non-touch related category, a human touch related category, an environment- related category, and a device-related [ Figure 3B; and paragraphs 0098-0100 ]. 6. As per claim 4, Dutt discloses wherein the determined baseline user profile score and the determined current user profile score are each further determined by applying an assigned stored weight to at least one value associated with the metrics in a combination of the categories [ i.e. dynamic weights assigned to each of the user specific characteristics ] [ paragraphs 0044, and 0089 ]. . As per claim 5, Dutt discloses determining if additional data in at least one of the metrics from the retrieved user profile data is needed when the calculated user confidence score is outside the threshold range; wherein when the determining indicates the additional data is needed, then: obtaining the additional data; recalculating the current user profile score based on the current values associated with the metrics in one of the categories obtained from the retrieved user profile data with the additional data [ i.e. if further verification is required, authentication is also made using other characteristics such as speed, acceleration and key login ] [ paragraphs 0089, 0141, and 0223 ]; wherein when the determining indicates the additional data is not needed, then: identifying the user as having an unknown designation; executing the identification action with respect to the user at the client based on the unknown designation [ i.e. identifying a fraudulent user and send verification message ] [ paragraphs 0190, 0199 and 0214 ]. 6. As per claims 6, and 8-10, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claims 1, 3-5. 6. As per claims 11, and 13-15, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claims 1, 3-5. 6. As per claims 16, and 18-20, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claims 1, 3-5. Claim(s) 1, 6, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sinchak et al. [ US Patent Application No 2017/0041145 ]. 8. As per claim 1, Sinchak discloses the invention as claimed including a method implemented by a network traffic management system comprising one or more host devices, server devices, network traffic management devices, or client devices the method [ Figure 5; and paragraph 0012 ] comprising: retrieving, in response to a received request requiring identification of a client, user profile data associated with a user at the client [ i.e. gathering present conditions from a plurality of device sensors ] [ 310, Figure 5; and paragraphs 0046-0050 ]; calculating a user confidence score [ i.e. trust score ] based on a determined baseline user profile score [ i.e. pre-recorded hash ] [ paragraph 0012 ] for the user at the client based on prior values associated with metrics in one or more categories obtained from the retrieved user profile data [ i.e. all measured conditions ] [ paragraph 0026 ] and a determined current user profile score for the user at the client based on current values associated with metrics in one or more categories obtained from the retrieved user profile data [ i.e. present hash ] [ paragraphs 0034, and 0035 ]; comparing the calculated user confidence score against a stored threshold range comprising minimum and maximum confidence threshold scores [ i.e. compare against set threshold ] [ 450, 470, Figure 6; and paragraph 0051 ]; and executing an action with respect to the user at the client in response to the received request based on the comparison of the calculated user confidence score against the stored threshold range [ i.e. user must enter their conventional authentication token ] [ paragraph 0052 ]. 9. As per claims 6, 11, and 16, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 2, 7, 12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dutt et al. [ US Patent Application No 2014/0337243 ], in view of Abuelsaad et al. [ US Patent Application No 2014/0317263 ]. As per claim 2, Dutt discloses determining, in response to the received request requiring identification, if the user profile data associated with the user at the client has been generated [ i.e. build user profile ] [ paragraphs 0137, and 0141 ]. Dutt does not specifically disclose generating the user profile data for the metrics in at least one of the categories when the determination indicates an absence of the user profile data associated with the user at the client. Abuelsaad discloses generating the user profile data for the metrics in at least one of the categories when the determination indicates an absence of the user profile data associated with the user at the client [ i.e. profile may be generated for the unknown user or newly identified user ] [ paragraphs 0057, 0058, and 0079 ]. It would have been obvious to a person skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Dutt in view of Abuelsaad because the teaching of Abuelsaad would enable to provide management of system security and user identification based on command historical analysis in a networked computing environment [ Abuelsaad, paragraph 0001 ]. As per claims 7, 12, and 17, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claim 2. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-6 PST. 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 Gillis can be reached at 571-2727952. 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. /DUSTIN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
May 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 24, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 31, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 08, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598220
RCS PROXY SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PSAP SESSIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593081
Systems and Methods for Dynamically Generating Manifests that Enable Dynamic Insertion of Content During Adaptive Streaming of Video
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581172
NETWORK MONITORING TO DETERMINE PERFORMANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICE PROVIDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572585
DIGITAL PICTURE FRAME CONTENT CLUSTERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12549793
Server-Side Adaptive Media Streaming
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+9.5%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 805 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month