Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/417,048

SYSTEMS PROVIDING USER ENGAGEMENT WITH ENHANCED AND PROCESSED DATA THAT MAINTAIN ANONYMITY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 19, 2024
Examiner
JEAN, FRANTZ B
Art Unit
2454
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
753 granted / 837 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
854
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
§103
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§112
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 837 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . This is a first office action in response to the instant application for letters patent filed on 19 January 2024. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. 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, 3-4, 10, 12-15, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stack et al hereinafter Stack Patent Number 9595051 B2. As per claim 1, Stack teaches a method, comprising: generating, by a computing system, an anonymous user profile for engaging anonymously with user interfaces provided by the computing system, wherein generating the anonymous user profile comprises retrieving, by the computing system, detailed user profile information associated with an anonymous individual user (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data); and associating, by the computing system, the user profile information with non-personally identifiable information (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data). As per claim 3, Stack teaches, according to method of claim 1, wherein a form is provided by the computing system prior to initial retrieval of the user profile information, and at least part of the retrieval occurs via the form (see fig 2, col 9 lines 36-44). As per claim 4, Stack teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the generation of the anonymous user profile is based at least partially on a query that locates an anonymized record of the anonymous individual user see abstract and col 1 lines 48-67). As per claim 10, Stack teaches the method of claim 1, comprising storing in a database, by a database system of the computing system, the user profile information according to the non-personally identifiable information (see fig 1, col 1 lines 55-67). As per claim 12, Stack inherently teaches the method of claim 1, wherein, in response to an initial use of an application associated with the anonymous user profile, the computing system associates the user profile information with an installation of the application in a client computing device, with prior approval of the user (see fig 2, col 9 lines 36-44). As per claim 13, Stack teaches the method of claim 12, wherein a unique identification of the application included in the non-personally identifiable information, comprises an installation identification related to the installation of the application (see fig 2, col 9 lines 36-44). As per claim 14, Stack teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising minimizing, by the computing system, a risk level of another actor or computing system determining an actual identity of the user associated with the user profile information (see col 4 lines 31-43; col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3). As per claim 15, Stack teaches a method, comprising: generating, by a computing system, an anonymous user profile for engaging anonymously with user interfaces provided by the computing system, wherein generating the anonymous user profile comprises retrieving, by the computing system, detailed user profile information associated with an anonymous individual user (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data), and wherein the detailed user profile information comprises user input received via a data scraping process (see lines 31-62); and associating, by the computing system, the user profile information with non-personally identifiable information (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data). As per claim 17, see the rejection of claim 14. As per claim 18, Stack teaches a method, comprising: generating, by a computing system, an anonymous user profile for engaging anonymously with user interfaces provided by the computing system, wherein generating the anonymous user profile comprises retrieving, by the computing system, detailed user profile information associated with an anonymous individual user (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data), and wherein the detailed user profile information comprises user input received via an interview provided by a form (see col 9 lines 36-44); and associating, by the computing system, the user profile information with non-personally identifiable information (see col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3; sharing user profile data in an anonymized manner …; see col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data). As per claim 20, Stack teaches the method of claim 18, further comprising minimizing, by the computing system, a risk level of another actor or computing system determining an actual identity of the user associated with the user profile information (see col 4 lines 31-43; col 1 line 47 to col 2 line 3). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 2, 5-9, 11, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overStack and Makrinich et al. hereinafter Makrinich 20210313052 A1. As per claim 2, Stack does not teach generating, by the computing system, a hypergraph by at least interlinking and organizing elements of pre-processed information as nodes in the hypergraph, wherein the nodes comprise the user profile information. However, Makrinich teaches the use of hypergraph in the same context as Stack (see par 0206). One skill artisan before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed would use a hypergraph to connect interoperative events or interlinking and organize elements of pre-processed information which may indicate a particular probability of outcome (see Makrinich par 0206). As per claim 5, Makrinich teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the query comprises an artificial intelligence enhanced query (see par 0055-0056, AI to analyze inputs and generate outputs). As per claim 6, Stack implicitly teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the query locates the record according to the non-personally identifiable information (see Stack col 5 lines 44-45 and 55-67, which identified the PII data and non-PII data). As per claim 7, Stack implicitly teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the non-personally identifiable information comprises an alphanumeric code (the non-PII describes in Stack col 5 lines 55-67 include alphanumeric code). As per claim 8, Stack The method of claim 7, wherein the code comprises a unique code (see col 5 lines 55-67, non-PII such as IP addresses, email addresses, cookie IDs, etc all contain unique code). As per claim 9, Stack teaches the method of claim 8, comprising storing in a database, by a database system of the computing system, the user profile information according to the unique code (see fig 1, database). As per claim 11, Makrinich teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the database is a NoSQL database (see par 0051, NoSQL alternative for data storage). As per claim 16, see the rejection of claim 2. As per claim 19, see the rejection of claim 2. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZ B JEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F. 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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at 5712723949. 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. /FRANTZ B JEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598235
METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING CROSS-RESOURCE EVENT NOTIFICATION, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, SYSTEM AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12579303
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGEMENT OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580912
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING A MESSAGE IN A COMMUNICATION NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12546820
TEST MODE CONTROL CIRCUIT, SEMICONDUCTOR APPARATUS AND SYSTEM, AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12545193
VEHICLE-MOUNTED CAMERA
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.6%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 837 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