Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/823,725

SCAN ENGINE AUTOSCALING USING CLUSTER-BASED PREDICTION MODELS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 04, 2024
Examiner
KIM, HEE SOO
Art Unit
2443
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Rapid7 Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
430 granted / 545 resolved
+20.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -0% lift
Without
With
+-0.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
579
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 545 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to application filed on September 13th, 2024. Claims 21~40 are examined. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/13/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Claims 1~20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1~20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,802. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the U.S Patent mentioned above substantially teaches and/or anticipates claims 1~20 of the instant application. For example, claim 1 of the U.S Patent reciting, “…similarities among client network asset deployments” anticipates the instant application’s “performing scans of client networks to assess the client networks…”, and thus not patentably distinct from each other. See the comparison below: Application: 18/823,725 U.S Patent 12,095,802 21. A method comprising: performing, by one or more computer systems that implement a security service: performing scans of a plurality of client networks to assess the client networks for security vulnerabilities or security events; building, based on observation data about a cluster of the client networks, a prediction model that predicts a security service load of security service associated with the client networks; determining, based on the prediction model, a first number of compute instances to use to perform scans on the cluster at a particular time in future; deploying, prior to the particular time, the first number of compute instances at the security service; and using, at the particular time, the first number of compute instances to perform scans on the cluster. 1. A method comprising: determining, based on a particular client network, a cluster of client networks, wherein the cluster of client networks is based on one or more similarities among client network asset deployments; determining, based on the cluster of client networks, a prediction model that indicates a security service load based on a particular time; determining, based on the prediction model, a first number of compute instances, where the first number of compute instances are usable to perform the security service; deploying, prior to receiving a request to perform the security service, the first number of compute instances; and initiating, in response to receiving the request to perform the security service, execution of the security service on the first number of compute instances. 31. (New) A system comprising: a security service implemented using one or more computer systems, configured to: perform scans of a plurality of client networks to assess the client networks for security vulnerabilities or security events; build, based on observation data about a cluster of the client networks, a prediction model that predicts a security service load of security service associated with the client networks; determine, based on the prediction model, a first number of compute instances to use to perform scans on the cluster at a particular time in future; deploy, prior to the particular time, the first number of compute instances at the security service; and use, at the particular time, the first number of compute instances to perform scans on the cluster. 9. A system comprising: a memory storing executable instructions; and one or more processors that execute the executable instructions to: determine, based on a particular client network, a cluster of client networks, wherein the cluster of client networks is based on one or more similarities among client network asset deployments; determine, based on the cluster of client networks, a prediction model that indicates a security service load based on a particular time; determine, based on the prediction model, a first number of compute instances, where the first number of compute instances are usable to perform the security service; deploy, prior to receiving a request to perform the security service, the first number of compute instances; and initiate, in response to receiving the request to perform the security service, execution of the security service on the first number of compute instances. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior arts teach nor render obvious claims 21~40. The claims will be allowed once a Terminal Disclaimer is filed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEE SOO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicholas Taylor can be reached on (571) 272-3889. 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. /HEE SOO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 04, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592968
Cloud-based deception technology with granular scoring for breach detection
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587522
DATA CLASSIFICATION LABEL MANAGEMENT AND ACCESS CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587573
REPORTING OF DELTA CHANNEL QUALITY INDICATOR (CQI)-MODULATION AND CODING SCHEME (MCS) INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579296
DATA SECURITY TRANSACTIONS USING SOFTWARE CONTAINER MACHINE READABLE CONFIGURATION DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574245
HEALTHCARE DATA MANAGEMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS USING HASH VALUES ON CLOUD SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
79%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-0.1%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 545 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