Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/649,601

ENABLING SECURE STORAGE AND SHARING OF IMAGES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 29, 2024
Examiner
TRUVAN, LEYNNA THANH
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Osom Products Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
379 granted / 498 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
520
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 498 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. The claimed invention of claims 1-20, filed on 4/29/2025, is acknowledged and considered. Claims 1, 7, and 14 are independent claims. Claims 1-20 are pending. Priority 3. The present application has relationship to: CON 18320197, filing date 5/18/2023 CON 18319997, filing date 5/18/2023 CON 18485296, filing date 10/11/2023 Information Disclosure Statement 4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/29/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the claims on 4/29/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 5. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12003622. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: Both current application 18649601 and US Patent 12003622 include similar features of secure sharing between multiple blockchains including a multiple public keys associated permissions and a first private linear sequence, receive a request to share the first encrypted image/file with a public key, permission to access the first encrypted image/file, shares the first encrypted image/file by decryption of the first encrypted image/file using a first private key to obtain a decrypted image/file, encrypt the decrypted image/file using the second public key to obtain a second encrypted image/file, provide the second encrypted image/file at a location associated with the second public key, and perform an image/file edit on the first encrypted image/file, wherein receive indication to edit the one of an encrypted image/file. Thus, the elements of claims 1-20 of the current application 18649601 contains all elements of claims 1-20 of US Patent 12003622. Claims 1-20 of the current application 18649601 is anticipated by claims 1-20 of US Patent 12003622. This is a non-provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have been patented. Allowable Subject Matter 6. Claims 1-20 are allowed over art. 7. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claims 1, 7, and 14 limit to a method, system, and non-transitory computer readable storage medium to enable secure sharing between multiple blockchains including to obtain a first public key associated with a first private linear sequence storing image or file operations that encrypts a content of a block that is part of the first private linear sequence storing image/file operations, obtain an image/file and use the first public key to encrypt the image/file to obtain a first encrypted image/file, store the first encrypted image/file on the first private linear sequence storing image/file operations, and receive a request to share the first encrypted image/file with a second public key that is different from the first public key. The claimed invention further determine whether the second public key has permission to access the first encrypted image/file, where upon determining there is permission to access the first encrypted image/file, shares the first encrypted image/file by decryption of the first encrypted image/file using a first private key to obtain a decrypted image/file, encrypt the decrypted image/file using the second public key to obtain a second encrypted image/file, provide the second encrypted image/file at a location associated with the second public key, and perform an image/file edit on the first encrypted image/file, wherein determine whether to propagate the image/file edit to the second encrypted image/file by obtaining a sharing property indicating whether to edit the second encrypted image/file, whereby propagate the image/file edit to the location associated with the second public key upon the sharing property indicates to share the image/file edit with the second encrypted image/file and do not propagate the image/file edit to the location associated with the second public key upon the sharing property does not indicate to share the image/file edit with the second encrypted image/file. Therefore, none of the references alone or in combination disclose or suggest the invention as claimed according to claims 1-20. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Leynna Truvan whose telephone number is (571)272-3851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM, EST. 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 Hirl can be reached at 571-272-3685. 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. Leynna Truvan Examiner Art Unit 2435 /L.TT/Examiner, Art Unit 2435 /EDWARD ZEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 29, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603917
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IP SPOOFING SECURITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12574242
CONTROLLED PRIVACY IN BIOMETRIC IDENTIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12556387
METHOD AND APPARATUS TO FACILITATE TRANSMISSION OF AN ENCRYPTED ROLLING CODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12554890
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRIVACY POLICY ENFORCEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12542657
Reinitialization of an application secret by way of the terminal
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
76%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+20.4%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 498 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