Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/750,295

DEVICE AND METHOD FOR SETTING PLURALITY OF USER ACCOUNTS TO SHARE DIGITAL COUPON

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 21, 2024
Examiner
LONG, MEREDITH A
Art Unit
3622
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
kakao Corp.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allow Rate
173 granted / 403 resolved
-9.1% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
440
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
38.1%
-1.9% vs TC avg
§103
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 403 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to the request for continued examination filed 17 March 2026. Claims 1, 9, and 10 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are currently pending. Claims 3-7, 12-16, and 18-20 are rejected. Claims 1, 2, 8-11, and 17 are allowed. 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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 17 March 2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment/Remarks The arguments relating to 35 USC § 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. As indicated in the Examiner Interview Summary (02/13/2026), Examiner was looking for support in the specification for a conclusion that the claims present a technical solution to a technical problem. Applicant has provided the support in the Remarks at page 12 which indicates the synchronization of the usable portion of the digital coupons among the plurality of user accounts to indicate a remaining balance available for use is indeed a technical solution to a technical problem. The support is found in the specification at [0086]. Accordingly, the rejections are withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 3-7, 12-16, and 18-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites “a first user account” and “a second user account.” Both of these entities are also introduced in claim 1. It is unclear if the first user account and the second user account introduced in claim 3 are the same first user account and second user account or a different first user account and second user account than the ones introduced in claim 1. Claim 3 is indefinite. Claim 4 recites “a first user account,” “a primary user account,” “a second user account,” and “a secondary user account.” All of these entities are also introduced in claim 1. It is unclear if the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 4 are the same or different than the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 1. Claim 4 is indefinite. Claim 5 recites “a secondary user account.” A secondary user account is introduced in claim 1. It is unclear if the secondary user account introduced in claim 5 is the same secondary user account or a different secondary user account than the one introduced in claim 1. Claim 5 is indefinite. Claim 6 recites “a primary user account” and “a secondary user account.” A primary user account and a secondary user account are both introduced in claim 1. It is unclear if the primary user account and the secondary user account introduced in claim 6 are the same primary user account and secondary user account or different primary user account and secondary user account than the ones introduced in claim 1. Claim 6 is indefinite. Claim 7 is rejected due to its dependence upon a rejected claim. Claim 12 recites “a first user account” and “a second user account.” Both of these entities are also introduced in claim 10. It is unclear if the first user account and the second user account introduced in claim 12 are the same first user account and second user account or a different first user account and second user account than the ones introduced in claim 10. Claim 12 is indefinite. Claim 13 recites “a first user account,” “a primary user account,” “a second user account,” and “a secondary user account.” All of these entities are also introduced in claim 10. It is unclear if the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 13 are the same or different than the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 10. Claim 13 is indefinite. Claim 14 recites “a secondary user account.” A secondary user account is introduced in claim 10. It is unclear if the secondary user account introduced in claim 14 is the same secondary user account or a different secondary user account than the one introduced in claim 10. Claim 14 is indefinite. Claim 15 recites “a primary user account” and “a secondary user account.” A primary user account and a secondary user account are both introduced in claim 10. It is unclear if the primary user account and the secondary user account introduced in claim 15 are the same primary user account and secondary user account or different primary user account and secondary user account than the ones introduced in claim 10. Claim 15 is indefinite. Claim 16 is rejected due to its dependence upon a rejected claim. Claim 18 recites “a first user account,” “a primary user account,” “a second user account,” and “a secondary user account.” All of these entities are also introduced in claim 9. It is unclear if the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 18 are the same or different than the first, primary, second, and secondary user accounts introduced in claim 9. Claim 18 is indefinite. Claim 19 recites “a secondary user account.” A secondary user account is introduced in claim 9. It is unclear if the secondary user account introduced in claim 19 is the same secondary user account or a different secondary user account than the one introduced in claim 9. Claim 19 is indefinite. Claim 20 recites “a primary user account” and “a secondary user account.” A primary user account and a secondary user account are both introduced in claim 9. It is unclear if the primary user account and the secondary user account introduced in claim 20 are the same primary user account and secondary user account or different primary user account and secondary user account than the ones introduced in claim 9. Claim 20 is indefinite. Claims 4, 13, and 18 recite the limitation “the sharing request” in lines 3-4 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. While a “sharing request” was previously recited in each independent claim, this limitation has been replaced with “a delivery request;” thus no antecedent basis remains for “the sharing request.” Examiner’s suggestion for amendment: Examiner suggests canceling claims 4, 13, and 18 as they are essentially redundant steps. Examiner suggests changing “a” to “the” for the affected entities in claims 3-6, 12-15, and 18-20. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 8-11, and 17 are allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEREDITH A LONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3196. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6. 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, Ilana Spar can be reached on 571-270-7537. 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. /MEREDITH A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Aug 14, 2025
Interview Requested
Aug 20, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 20, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 09, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Feb 02, 2026
Interview Requested
Feb 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12482019
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR POST TRANSACTION SEASONAL ITEM RECOMMENDATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12450635
SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR A UNIVERSAL INTEGRATION FRAMEWORK FOR DATA ANALYTICS PIPELINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Patent 12443949
DATA SECURITY FOR TRANSACTIONS WITH SECURE OFFER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12424331
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING HEALTH TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12417848
PREDICTION TOOL FOR PATIENT IMMUNE RESPONSE TO A THERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 16, 2025
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
43%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (+21.8%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 403 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