Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/425,235

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SCAN, TRY, AND BUY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 29, 2024
Priority
Jun 25, 2013 — continuation of 10/235,710 +2 more
Examiner
SEIBERT, CHRISTOPHER B
Art Unit
3688
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Transforms Sr Brands LLC
OA Round
7 (Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
8-9
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
251 granted / 431 resolved
+6.2% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+41.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
459
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
40.9%
+0.9% vs TC avg
§103
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 431 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Claims 27-38 are pending in this application. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/9/2026 has been entered. 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 27-38 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 claims contain 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 27 and 33 recite a transmitter. The specification does not mention this claim element nor is it described or depicted in such a way to show that applicant had possession of this element at the time of filing. Claims 28-32 and 34-37 depend from claims 27 and 33, inherent the same deficiencies, and are rejected on the same basis. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 9/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that communication subsystem 206 corresponds to the claimed transmitter. However, applicant has claimed a specific hardware component not mentioned in the originally filed specification and claims. The capability of generic computer functionality as argued does not transform a communication subsystem into a transmitter. Therefore, the §112(a) rejection is maintained. The examiner recommends amending the claims to match applicant’s disclosure, i.e. claim a communication subsystem instead. Conclusion All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 CHRISTOPHER B SEIBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-5549. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Smith can be reached at 571-272-6763. 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. /CHRISTOPHER B SEIBERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 10 earlier events
Jan 15, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 17, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 09, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 02, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12737795
LABOR MARKETPLACE EXCHANGE AND METHODS THEREOF
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12727783
System Platform and Method for Personalized Shopping Using an Automated Shopping Assistant
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12731138
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING MULTIPLE APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACES FOR A BROWSER TO MANAGE PAYMENTS FROM A PAYMENT SERVICE
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12711537
SECURED ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT OF SHARED STORAGE RESOURCES
3y 2m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12700026
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING PERSONALIZED EFFICIENCY RECOMMENDATIONS
4y 4m to grant Granted Aug 04, 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

8-9
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+41.3%)
2y 11m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 431 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