Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/613,405

METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND MEDIA FOR GENERATING A MEDIA QUALITY SCORE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PRESENTATION OF A CONTENT ITEM

Final Rejection §101§DP
Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Examiner
ALAM, MUSHFIKH I
Art Unit
2426
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Integral Ad Science, INC.
OA Round
2 (Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
295 granted / 509 resolved
At TC average
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
541
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
68.3%
+28.3% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 509 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Claim 1-20 is pending. 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 . Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-22 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,943,503. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Present Application 18/613,405 Patent 11,943,503 1. A method for evaluating multiple qualities of a presented content item, the method comprising: associating, using a hardware processor, each measurement of a subset of a plurality of measurements from a plurality of measurement streams with a particular time position of the presentation of a content item, wherein groups of measurements are associated with respective time positions of the presentation of the content item; in response to associating each measurement of the subset of the plurality of measurements with the particular time position of the presentation of the content item, determining, using the hardware processor, that a measurement from the plurality of measurements is not associated with the particular time position; assigning, using the hardware processor, a missing measurement to the measurement that was not associated with the particular time position based on previous measurements from a corresponding measurement stream, wherein the missing measurement is included in a first group of measurements of the groups of measurements associated with respective time positions; generating, using the hardware processor, combined scores at the respective time positions; generating, using the hardware processor, a media quality score based on the combined scores at respective time positions for the presentation of the content item. 1. A method for evaluating multiple qualities of a presented content item, the method comprising: associating, using a hardware processor, each measurement of a subset of a plurality of measurements from a plurality of measurement streams with a particular time position of the presentation of a content item, wherein groups of measurements are associated with respective time positions of the presentation of the content item; in response to associating each measurement of the subset of the plurality of measurements with the particular time position of the presentation of the content item, determining, using the hardware processor, that a measurement from the plurality of measurements is not associated with the particular time position; assigning, using the hardware processor, a missing measurement to the measurement that was not associated with the particular time position based on previous measurements from a corresponding measurement stream, wherein the missing measurement is included in a first group of measurements of the groups of measurements associated with the respective time positions; multiplicatively combining, using the hardware processor, for each time position of the presentation of the content item associated with a respective group of measurements in the groups of measurements, each measurement in the respective group of measurements to generate combined scores at the respective time positions; and generating, using the hardware processor, a media quality score based on the combined scores at respective time positions for the presentation of the content item. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 5/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim 1, the amendment of claim 1 related to combining scores and is still relating to the Double Patenting of 11,943,503. A Terminal Disclaimer is still required. Conclusion Claim 1-20 is rejected. 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 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. Inquiries Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSHFIKH I ALAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1710. The examiner can normally be reached 1:00PM-9:00PM. 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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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. MUSHFIKH I. ALAM Primary Examiner Art Unit 2426 /MUSHFIKH I ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426 9/10/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 25, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §DP
May 29, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §101, §DP
Mar 16, 2026
Notice of Allowance
Mar 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587707
SESSION TYPE CLASSIFICATION FOR MODELING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581157
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEDIA CONTENT HAND-OFF BASED ON TYPE OF BUFFERED DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578752
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR OPERATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563241
INTERACTIVE METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556751
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING LIVE STREAMING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+38.5%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 509 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