Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/739,632

AUTOMATED USER-CENTRIC SERVER MANAGEMENT

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 11, 2024
Examiner
ANYAN, BARBARA BURGESS
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
53%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
569 granted / 731 resolved
+19.8% vs TC avg
Minimal -24% lift
Without
With
+-24.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
7 currently pending
Career history
738
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§103
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§102
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 731 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/11/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1-4, 9-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rossman et al. (hereinafter “Ross”, US Patent 10291622 B1). As per claims 1, 12, 17, Ross Ross discloses A computer-implemented method, non-transitory processor-readable storage medium, and apparatus comprising: Obtaining multiple requests for access to one or more server-related resources in connection with at least one time period (column 2, lines 2-7, 65-67, column 5, lines 26-31, 42-50, Multiple requests are received over a determined period of time); Identifying at least a first portion of the multiple requests as corresponding to a first category of user type and at least a second portion of the multiple requests as corresponding to a second category of user type by processing user credentials associated with the multiple requests (column 3, lines 36-42, column 5, lines 42-48, 55-60, column 6, lines 13-26, Multiple requests are compared against rules including request types to determine access authorization); Automatically processing, during the at least one time period, the first portion of the multiple requests corresponding to the first category of user type (column 3, lines 36-42, column 5, lines 42-48, 55-60, column 6, lines 13-26, Multiple requests are compared against rules including request types to determine access authorization); Prioritizing, in at least one request queue data structure, the second portion of the multiple requests corresponding to the second category of user type based at least in part on one or more request volume parameters related to the at least one time period and at least a subset of the user credentials associated with the second portion of the multiple requests (column 8, lines 60-67, column 9, lines 1-10, 22-25, 63-67, column 10, lines 1-15, Determining whether requests were received in the appropriate order. Quorum rules for access includes a specified or minimum number of requests received with the appropriate signatures and/or from the appropriate sources, or types of sources); Automatically processing, during the at least one time period, at least part of the second portion of the multiple requests corresponding to the second category of user type from the at least one request queue data structure in accordance with the prioritizing of the second portion of the multiple requests (column 11, lines 22-45, column 12, lines 20-22, Determining whether requests were received in the appropriate order. Quorum rules for access includes a specified or minimum number of requests received with the appropriate signatures and/or from the appropriate sources, or types of sources. Request are stored in log records or cache); Wherein the method is performed by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory (column 6, lines 1-5, column 13, lines 30-45) . As per claims 2, 13, 18, Ross discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the at least one time period comprises a time period corresponding to a level of server traffic exceeding a designated threshold (column 1, lines 64-67, column 2, lines 1-5). As per claims 3, 14, 19, Ross discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein identifying at least a first portion of the multiple requests as corresponding to the first category of user type comprises determining that the first portion of the multiple requests are associated with users having one or more designated server access privileges by comparing user credentials associated with the first portion of the multiple requests with a predefined set of user credentials attributed to users having the one or more designated server access privileges (column 3, lines 16-47, column 4, lines 10-30). As per claims 4, 15, 20, Ross discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein prioritizing the second portion of the multiple requests corresponding to the second category of user type comprises determining a number of requests made, during the at least one time period, by each user associated with the second portion of the multiple requests (Abstract, column 2, lines 1-5, column 4, lines 1-5). As per claim 9, Ross discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring the at least one request queue data structure to temporarily store requests corresponding to the second category of user type and ordered based at least in part on priority levels assigned to the requests corresponding to the second category of user type (column 11, lines 22-45, column 12, lines 20-22). As per claim 10, Ross discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 9, further comprising: assigning the priority levels to the requests corresponding to the second category of user type based at least in part on the user credentials associated with the requests corresponding to the second category of user type (column 11, lines 22-45, column 12, lines 20-22). As per claim 11, Ross disclsoes The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein automatically processing the first portion of the multiple requests corresponding to the first category of user type comprises automatically granting access, to the first portion of the multiple requests as prioritized over the second portion of the multiple requests, to at least a portion of the one or more server-related resources (column 11, lines 22-45, column 12, lines 20-22). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-8, 16 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARBARA BURGESS ANYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3996. The examiner can normally be reached IFP M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. 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. March 14, 2026 /BARBARA B Anyan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603900
FULLY AUTOMATED PEN TESTING WITH SECURITY POLICY CORRECTION USING GENERATIVE LLM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597041
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE(AI) MANAGEMENT SYSTEM USINGBLOCKCHAIN, AI MANAGEMENT REGISTRATION METHOD AND AI MANAGEMENT USAGE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591472
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NON-DISRUPTIVE SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS AND INTEGRATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592830
METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM FOR POST-QUANTUM ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE BASED ON INFINITE HASH FUNCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579239
AUTHENTICATION FOR BIOMETRIC CHECKOUT USING RBA MODELING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
53%
With Interview (-24.5%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 731 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