Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/773,495

TENANT DATA RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS ENFORCEMENT IN MULTITENANT COLLABORATIVE WORK ENVIRONMENTS

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Jul 15, 2024
Priority
Apr 14, 2021 — continuation of 12/039,496
Examiner
TRUONG, CAM Y T
Art Unit
2169
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Atlassian US Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
694 granted / 841 resolved
+27.5% vs TC avg
Strong +61% interview lift
Without
With
+61.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
855
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
90.0%
+50.0% vs TC avg
§102
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§112
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 841 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION Applicant has amended claims 21, 26-27, 31, 33, 35-36, and 39 in the filed amendment on 4/6/2026. Claims 21-26, 33-40 are pending in this office action. 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-26 and 33-40 have been considered but are moot in new ground of rejection. 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 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because claims contain no hardware. Thus, the claims lack the necessary physical articles or objects to constitute a machine or a manufacture within the meaning of 35 USC 101. They are clearly not a series of steps or acts to be a process nor are they a combination of chemical compounds to be a composition of matter. As such, they fail to fall within a statutory category. They are, at best, functional descriptive material per se. 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 21-26, 33-40 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. The limitation “wherein the selecting the account identifier includes confirming the data request is from an authenticated and authorized user of the client device” in claims 21, 33 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. Remark: According to paragraph 114 of the specification: “ Once the data object manager service 210 has received a particular request for data, and one or more other upstream systems (e.g., the authentication and/or authorization service 204, the multitenant query proxy service 206, and/or the object/account provisioning service 212) have confirmed that the request is from an authenticated and authorized user of the client device 202, the data object manager service 210 can determine which among a set of hosting platform accounts stores the requested data”, the when the data request is received, one or more other upstream systems have confirmed that the request is from an authenticated and authorized user of the client device 202. However, the selecting of the account identifier does not include step of “confirming the data request is from an authenticated and authorized user of the client device”. The dependent claims 22-26, 34-40 of claims 21 and 33 are rejected under the same reason as discussed in claims 21 and 33. 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 21-26, 33-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The limitation “that are physically located in respective physical regions” is unclear whether “that” refers “data lakes”, “account identifier” or “a set” The dependent claims 22-26, 34-40 of claims 21 and 33 are rejected under the same reason as discussed in claims 21 and 33. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WOLFRAM et al (US 20170344654) Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAM-Y T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-4042. The examiner can normally be reached (571) 272 4042. 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, SHERIEF BADAWI can be reached at (571) 272-9782. 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. /CAM Y T TRUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 2 earlier events
Jul 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112
Oct 14, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112
Mar 17, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 05, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
May 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12675497
DATA PREPARATION AND MODELING USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
1y 2m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12650965
EXTERNALLY DISTRIBUTED BUCKETS FOR EXECUTION OF QUERIES
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12632416
REPRESENTING AND USING METADATA VIA THE USE OF GRAPH DATABASE
3y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12625890
INTERACTIVE DATASET PREPARATION
2y 4m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12625845
RESPONDING TO A USER QUERY USING MACHINE LEARNING
1y 12m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+61.3%)
3y 2m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 841 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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