Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/816,906

INTERACTIVE, APPLICATION ADJUSTABLE, REENTRANT DESIGN FOR USER GESTURE RECORDING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 27, 2024
Priority
Sep 17, 2023 — provisional 63/538,829
Examiner
TRAN, TUYETLIEN T
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ORACLE INTERNATIONAL Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
443 granted / 652 resolved
+7.9% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
668
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
§112
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 652 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to the following communication: The claims filed on 08/27/2024. This action is made non-final. Claims 1-20 are pending in the case. Claims 1 and 15 are independent claims. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-2, 7-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katalon Studio (“Record web utility in Katalon Studio”, published on July 1, 2022; hereinafter Katalon. Note: this document is recited in the IDS filed on 09/04/2024) in view of Bienfait et al. (US 2023/0281023 A1; hereinafter Bienfait). As to claim 1, Katalon teaches: A method comprising: while recording user actions with respect to a website, detecting that a user entered text within a text field of a webpage of the website (see Page 1, “you only need to manually interact with your website and perform all the desired actions as a real user while the Katalon Recorder Utility record them”. Page 4: when user types in a password in the Password field, Katalon Web Recorder uses the Set Encrypted Text keyword automatically. The input value is encrypted to ensure security); causing an action pane to be presented, wherein the action pane includes a value text field and a test value text field (See Page 4: “ROCERDED ACTIONS” pane); in response to the detecting, inserting the text into the test value text field of the action pane (See Page 4: “John Doe”); wherein the method is performed by one or more computing devices (Page 2: Download and install the Katalon Recorder add-on first and user your preferred browser [which is installed on a computing device] to start recording). Katalon discloses Save Script, test objects are stored in a selected direction (see Page 4); therefore, it appears Katalon teaches storing an association between the text, the text field, and the test value text field as part of a workflow (see Page 4 and Page 10-11; Variables Name and Default Value are being stored and can be managed using Variables pane). However, Katalon does not explicitly disclose such teaching in text description. Bienfait is relied upon for teaching the limitations. Specifically, Bienfait teaches a method and a system for automatically creating workflow automations (see Abstract and ¶ 0026); the method is performed by one or more computing devices (see Fig. 1 and ¶ 0030-0032) comprising: storing an association between the text, the text field, and the test value text field as part of a workflow (see ¶ 0032-0034; data generated by the recorder is stored in the storage device 113, the stored data includes application data 114 may comprise images of application user interfaces, as well as data defining various elements of such user interfaces. As will be described below, an element may be defined by its location and dimensions within a user interface, its type (e.g., text box, drop-down menu, selectable toggle), and an identifier. Interaction data 115 may represent individual interactions (e.g., clicks, selections and text entries) of a user with elements of one or more user interfaces. For example, over a user-designated period of time, recorder 112 may generate and store interaction data 115 which indicates a sequence of user interactions performed on various elements of a user interface). Both references are related to creating workflow automations; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Katalon with the teachings of Bienfait to provide a method that allows the user to record user actions with text fields of a webpage as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in Bienfait of providing a mechanism to generate automated workflows efficiently and with reduced development time and errors (Bienfait: see ¶ 0004). As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: wherein the action pane is presented in response to the detecting (Katalon: See Page 4: “ROCERDED ACTIONS” pane). As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: detecting a plurality of test values in the workflow; causing one or more prompts to be presented that allows a second user to select, for each test value of the plurality of test values, either said test value or a parameterized option (Katalon: Pages 7-10; run options). As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: wherein detecting the plurality of test values and causing the one or more prompts to be presented are performed prior to initiating a test run of the workflow (Katalon: Pages 7-10; run options). As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: receiving, from a computing device a first user, input that specifies a secret parameter to be associated with a particular text field in the website; wherein a value of the secret parameter is not viewable by the first user and was established by a second user, that is different than the first user, prior to receiving the input; wherein the secret parameter is a username or a password (Katalon: Page 4: when user types in a password in the Password field, Katalon Web Recorder uses the Set Encrypted Text keyword automatically. The input value is encrypted to ensure security). As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: while recording the user actions with the website, automatically creating one or more pre-validations for one or more graphical nodes in the workflow that is created based on the recording; while executing the workflow, processing the one or more pre-validations (Katalon: see Pages 6-7; Validate UI elements). As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: wherein a particular pre-validation of the one or more pre-validations includes a timer, the expiration of which causes a robot that executes the workflow to generate a message that is part of the particular pre-validation (Katalon: see Pages 6-8; Validate UI elements; error message). As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: wherein a particular pre-validation of the one or more pre-validations is the existence of a user interface element, wherein a robot that executes the workflow, when processing the particular pre-validation, makes multiple attempts to access the UI element when the UI element is not yet visible or rendered (Katalon: see Pages 6-8; Validate UI elements; error message). As to claim 13, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: further comprising: while recording the user actions with respect to the website, detecting that the user selects particular text on a second webpage of the website; causing, to be presented, a second action pane; receiving, through the second action pane, user input that specifies a location where to save the particular text (Katalon: see Page 4; choose a directory you want your test objects to be stored in to continue). As to claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait further teach: further comprising: wherein the location is one of an output source of an entity that executes the workflow, an internal variable that is used later in the workflow, or a third-party data source (Katalon: see Page 4; choose a directory you want your test objects to be stored in to continue). As to claim 15, claim 15 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 1; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). As to claim 17, claim 17 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 7; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). As to claim 18, claim 18 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 9; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). As to claim 19, claim 19 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 10; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). As to claim 20, claim 20 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 13; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). Claims 3-6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katalon/Bienfait further in view of Katalon Studio (“Katalon Studio: Best Practices”, published Jan-2022, hereinafter Katalon_2). As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Katalon and Bienfait do not appear to teach receiving, through the action pane, user input that selects a reference, to a source of input, to include in the text field during execution of the workflow. Katalon_2 is relied upon for teaching the deficient limitations. Specifically, Katalon_2 discloses receiving, through the action pane, user input that selects a reference, to a source of input, to include in the text field during execution of the workflow (see Page 6: Do not use any hard coding values for test cases; use some files, Excel, and a database to manage input values). The references, each is related to creating workflow automations; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Katalon/Bienfait with the teaching of Katalon_2 to provide a method that allows the user to manage input values as claimed. One of ordinary skills in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because of the overlapping subject matter, and the advantages described in Katalon_2 of providing a mechanism to manage input values; thus, enhance user experience with the workflow automations (Katalon_2: Page 6). As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated. Katalon/Bienfait/Katalon_2 further teach: in response to selection of the reference, updating the value text field, in the action pane, to include the reference (Katalon_2: Page 6-9; Page 9 shows the test Data File being updated/included). Thus, combining Katalon/Bienfait/Katalon_2 would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3. As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated. Katalon/Bienfait/Katalon_2 further teach: in response to selection of the reference, updating the value text field, in the action pane, to include the reference (Katalon_2: Page 6-9; Page 9 shows Variable Binding pane). Thus, combining Katalon/Bienfait/Katalon_2 would meet the claimed limitations for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3. As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated. Katalon/Bienfait/Katalon_2 further teach: before or during a test run of the workflow, causing a prompt to be presented, wherein the prompt asks a second user whether the text in the test value text field should be used during the test run or whether the reference in the value text field should be used during the test run (Katalon: Pages 7-10; run options). As to claim 16, claim 16 is directed to one or more non-transitory storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause the computer to implement the method of claim 3; therefore, is rejected under similar rationale (Bienfait: see ¶ 0037, 0082). Conclusion The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action. It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYETLIEN T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1033. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 AM - 8:00 PM. 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, Irete (Fred) Ehichioya can be reached on 571-272-4034. 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. /TUYETLIEN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 27, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12693876
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12689602
INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, CONTROL METHOD, AND SERVER DEVICE
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12688592
ZERO SHOT LOCALIZATION FOR AUTONOMOUS DRIVING
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12687957
METHODS AND USER INTERFACES FOR ACCOUNT RECOVERY
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12681623
USER EXPERIENCE PLATFORM FOR INTERACTING WITH AN ORGANIC MATTER PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.4%)
3y 10m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 652 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