Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/750,817

System and Method for High Performance Secure Access to a Trusted Platform Module on a Hardware Virtualization Platform

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Jun 21, 2024
Examiner
CYGIEL, GARY W
Art Unit
2137
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
405 granted / 533 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
553
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.4%
+2.4% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 533 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the specification does not provide a definition for the claimed “computer-readable storage media”. A Broadest reasonable interpretation for the term “computer -readable storage media” would include both statutory embodiments and non-statutory embodiments such as signals. The words "storage" and/or "recording" are insufficient to convey only statutory embodiments to one of ordinary skill in the art absent an explicit and deliberate limiting definition or clear differentiation between storage media and transitory media in the disclosure. As such, the claim(s) is/are drawn to a form of energy. Energy is not one of the four categories of invention and therefore this/these claim(s) is/are not statutory. Energy is not a series of steps or acts and thus is not a process. Energy is not a physical article or object and as such is not a machine or manufacture. Energy is not a combination of substances and therefore not a composition of matter. Amending the claims to recite a "non-transitory computer-readable storage media” would overcome this rejection. 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 25-39 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 claim(s) contains 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 25, 30, and 35 describe tracking one or more calls previously associated with the TPM or the operation, but the specification does not appear to describe the concept of tracking at all. The examiner notes that figure 5 and the associated description includes identifying whether or not the current call is an initial request, but that is not the same as the claimed tracking. Identifying whether something is an initial request does not explicitly or implicitly require tracking of prior calls. As an example, an initial request may simply take a specific form or be a specific command and non-initial requests may be identified simply by having a different form or being a different command, neither of which require any tracking of prior calls. Since the originally filed specification fails to detail how this tracking works or is integrated into the base system, the applicant’s claims fail to comply with the written description requirement. For the purposes of examination, the claimed tracking will be given its common and usual meaning which is to follow and note the course or progress of. Claims 26-29, 31-34, and 36-39 are rejected as being dependent from, but failing to cure the deficiencies of, a rejected base claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 25-39 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, consistent with the interpretation provided by the examiner, set forth in this Office action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. [A] Xu et al. (NPL – Satem: Trusted Service Code Execution across Transactions) XU et al. describes issuing calls to a TPM supported service (see, e.g., XU §4 #5), tracking the results of previous calls to a TPM and verifying authentication information (see, e.g., XU §4 #2 and #4, valid only if p = p’) and storing results in a protected memory region (XU, e.g., §5.1.1 #4). [B] Bajikar et al. (US PGPub No. 2005/0039013) Bajikar et al. describes that attestation information can be stored in the TPM (see, e.g., Bajikar:Fig 3). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gary W Cygiel whose telephone number is (571)270-1170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 11am-3pm PST. 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, Arpan P Savla can be reached at (571) 272-1077. 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. /Gary W. Cygiel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2137
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602176
COMPUTING DEVICE AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596505
COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM HAVING STORED THEREIN INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591519
MEMORY DEVICE AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591368
VIRTUALIZED-IN-HARDWARE INPUT OUTPUT MEMORY MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579086
DATA STORAGE WITH LOW COST DIES
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
76%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+9.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 533 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