Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/817,115

PROTECTING MEDIA CONTENT INTEGRITY ACROSS UNTRUSTED NETWORKS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Aug 27, 2024
Examiner
SHELEHEDA, JAMES R
Art Unit
2424
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Amazon Technologies, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
469 granted / 693 resolved
+9.7% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
736
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.3%
+9.3% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 693 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED 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 . 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. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims fully disclose and encompass the claims of the instant application with any differences being minor variations therein. For example, claim 21 corresponds to claims 1, 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. 21. (New) A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more memories have stored thereon instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to implement a media player, wherein the media player is configured to A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more memories have stored thereon instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to implement a media player, wherein the media player is configured to: receive, based on user input, a request to stream media content of a broadcaster; in response to the request to stream media content, send a request to a provider network, wherein the request indicates a manifest for the requested media content; receive a manifest from a provider network, wherein the manifest comprises at least a public key and an indication of a location at an edge network from which the media content can be retrieved, and wherein the manifest is received by the media player over a secure connection with the provider network in accordance with a security communication protocol; receive the manifest from the provider network, wherein the manifest comprises at least a public key and an indication of a location at an edge network from which the media content can be retrieved, wherein the edge network is external to the provider network, and wherein the manifest is received by the media player over a secure connection with the provider network in accordance with a security communication protocol; retrieve at least some of the media content from the location, wherein the retrieved media content comprises a plurality of content portions of the media content; retrieve at least some of the media content from the location, wherein the retrieved media content comprises a plurality of content portions of the media content; play a content portion of the plurality of content portions of the media content; use the public key received by the media player from the provider network to determine whether a digital signature of one or more of the content portions of the media content retrieved by the media player from the location external to the provider network is valid; and in response to a determination that the digital signature is valid, play at least one of the content portions. subsequent to the playing of the content portion, use the public key received by the media player from the provider network to determine whether a digital signature of the content portion is valid; and 4. The system of claim 1, wherein to determine whether the digital signature of one or more of the content portions is valid, the media player is further configured to: subsequent to play of a particular one of the content portions, determine whether a digital signature of the particular content portion is valid; and based on a determination that the digital signature of the content portion is valid, play one or more additional content portions of the plurality of content portions of the media content. 4. in response to a determination that the digital signature of the particular content portion is valid, play one or more additional portions of the retrieved media content. Similarly, Claims 21, 28, 35 each similarly correspond to claims 6, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889, as obvious variations of systems and computer readable mediums performing the methods. Claim 22 corresponds to claim 5, 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 23 corresponds to claim 9, 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 24 corresponds to claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 25 corresponds to claim 4, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 26 corresponds to claim 1, 6, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 27 corresponds to claim 1, 6, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 29 corresponds to claim 5, 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 30 corresponds to claim 9, 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 31 corresponds to claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 32 corresponds to claim 4, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 34 corresponds to claim 1, 6, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 34 corresponds to claim 1, 6, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 36 corresponds to claim 5, 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 37 corresponds to claim 9, 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 38 corresponds to claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 39 corresponds to claim 4, 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Claim 40 corresponds to claim 1,6,10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,588,889. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST. 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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. /James R Sheleheda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 27, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604070
VIDEO PREVIEW METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587699
Synchronizing Playback of Multimedia Between In-Vehicle and Mobile Devices
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12542941
AFFINITY PROFILE SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12519716
METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF OPERATING SOFTWARE-DEFINED NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12505466
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR DETERMINING OUTCOMES FOR PROMOTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+19.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 693 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