Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/842,501

System and Method for Light Data File Upload Prevention

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 29, 2024
Examiner
RAHIM, MONJUR
Art Unit
2436
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Proofpoint, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
742 granted / 879 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 879 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION 1. This action is responsive to: an original application filed on 29 August 2024. 2. Claims 1-21 are currently pending and claims 1 and 6 are independent claims. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Priority 4. Priority claimed from provisional application no.63/316,493, filed on 4 March 2022. Drawings 5. The drawings filed on 29 August 2024 are accepted by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-3, 5-17 and 19-20 are rejected 35 U.S.C §102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Meier et al. (US Publication No. 20170154188), hereinafter Meier. Regarding claim 1: A system for preventing upload of a computer source file to an upload destination, comprising (Meier, Abstract): a computer comprising a processor and a memory (Meier, ¶14), wherein copy or cut action is same as upload which is blocked/prevented based on certain criteria/condition. a user application accessed by a user via the computer (Meier, ¶5, ¶20, ¶146), wherein specific information collected by the user from source document using copy and paste instruction. an agent application hosted by the computer (Meier, FIG.3), wherein “operating system integrator” works as a agent application which interact and provide information about copy/upload of users’ action. configured to perform the steps of: registering for a notification of a user interface action with an operating system (OS) of the computer (Meier, ¶132, FIG.3), wherein any cut/paste action performed by the user it gets registered by Operating system (OS) via “operating system integrator”. receiving notice from the OS of the user interface action associated with the registering (Meier, ¶132, Fig.3 and Fig.4), wherein the user copies data into memory, such as a clipboard provided by an operating system of a host computer system that the system user is accessing. This action may be monitored by command listener 21 of Cut/copy action and paste filter 20 illustrated in FIG. 4. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 3, OS integrator 39 may interact with, or may be embedded as part of the operating system of the host or may interact with or may be embedded as part of a clipboard manager application of the operating system and the operating system may notify of any cut/copy action and/or paste action. One or more or all of the components of cut/copy and paste filter 20 may be thought of as being part of copy and paste logic shown in FIG. 3. determining the user interface action is indicative of a data file upload operation of a source file to an upload destination (Meier, ¶61-62 and ¶67), wherein, copy and paste action determine by the operating system (OS) during user session, where it gets monitor and interception. comparing a property of the source file and a property of the upload destination to a blocking criteria (Meier, ¶61, 67), wherein A cut/copy and paste action performed by the operating system is monitored and intercepted during a user's session, and the action may be blocked, filtered, logged, archived, suppressed and/or mitigated based on various rules. Session information, user information and system specific-information may be collected to support the cut/copy and paste control decision, according to the rules. Various types of information may be captured and used as a basis for deciding whether to block and/or to report and/or to limit and/or to alter and/or to suppress an attempt to cut/copy and paste data from the clipboard. The cut/copy action or the paste action may be blocked, or a combination of the cut/copy and paste action may be blocked or controlled according to the description herein. The term cut or cut action as used herein may sometimes mean copy or copy action, and vice versa and information may be retrieved to, and analyzed by, application information analyzer 22 illustrated in FIG. 4. [0067] Name or title of the source document and/or of the destination document, for example, the name or title of the source and/or destination document, source and/or destination document purpose, the electronic folder or file of the source and/or the destination document, the document type, document content, or the like (document, as used here may mean, in addition, a source/destination database, webpage, website or server, device, data stream, or the like. and preventing the user application from receiving the user interface action indicative of the data file upload operation of a source file to an upload destination (Meier, ¶14, ¶16, ¶126), wherein user action detector detects the copy or paste action from a source to destination and it gets blocked/prevented based on rules. wherein the user interface action comprises detection by the OS of a user interaction with a controller of a graphical user interface pointer and/or a pressing of one or more keys on a keyboard user interface (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 2: wherein the step of the agent determining the user interface action is indicative of a data file upload operation of a source file to an upload destination further comprises detecting a data source file selection action (Meier, ¶61). Regarding claim 3: wherein the agent is further configured to perform the steps of: accessing source file properties of the source file; and comparing the source file properties to the blocking criteria (Meier, ¶8-9). Regarding claim 5: further comprising a file picker configured to facilitate the user interface action (Meier, ¶129). Regarding claim 6: A computer based method for preventing upload of a computer source file to an upload destination, comprising (Meier, Abstract): a computer comprising a processor and a memory (Meier, ¶14), wherein copy or cut action is same as upload which is blocked/prevented based on certain criteria/condition. a user application accessed by a user via the computer (Meier, ¶5, ¶20, ¶146), wherein specific information collected by the user from source document using copy and paste instruction. an agent application hosted by the computer (Meier, FIG.3), wherein “operating system integrator” works as a agent application which interact and provide information about copy/upload of users’ action. configured to perform the steps of: registering for a notification of a user interface action with an operating system (OS) of the computer (Meier, ¶132, FIG.3), wherein any cut/paste action performed by the user it gets registered by Operating system (OS) via “operating system integrator”. receiving notice from the OS of the user interface action associated with the registering (Meier, ¶132, Fig.3 and Fig.4), wherein the user copies data into memory, such as a clipboard provided by an operating system of a host computer system that the system user is accessing. This action may be monitored by command listener 21 of Cut/copy action and paste filter 20 illustrated in FIG. 4. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 3, OS integrator 39 may interact with, or may be embedded as part of the operating system of the host or may interact with or may be embedded as part of a clipboard manager application of the operating system and the operating system may notify of any cut/copy action and/or paste action. One or more or all of the components of cut/copy and paste filter 20 may be thought of as being part of copy and paste logic shown in FIG. 3. determining the user interface action is indicative of a data file upload operation of a source file to an upload destination (Meier, ¶61-62 and ¶67), wherein, copy and paste action determine by the operating system (OS) during user session, where it gets monitor and interception. comparing a property of the source file and a property of the upload destination to a blocking criteria (Meier, ¶61, 67), wherein A cut/copy and paste action performed by the operating system is monitored and intercepted during a user's session, and the action may be blocked, filtered, logged, archived, suppressed and/or mitigated based on various rules. Session information, user information and system specific-information may be collected to support the cut/copy and paste control decision, according to the rules. Various types of information may be captured and used as a basis for deciding whether to block and/or to report and/or to limit and/or to alter and/or to suppress an attempt to cut/copy and paste data from the clipboard. The cut/copy action or the paste action may be blocked, or a combination of the cut/copy and paste action may be blocked or controlled according to the description herein. The term cut or cut action as used herein may sometimes mean copy or copy action, and vice versa and information may be retrieved to, and analyzed by, application information analyzer 22 illustrated in FIG. 4. [0067] Name or title of the source document and/or of the destination document, for example, the name or title of the source and/or destination document, source and/or destination document purpose, the electronic folder or file of the source and/or the destination document, the document type, document content, or the like (document, as used here may mean, in addition, a source/destination database, webpage, website or server, device, data stream, or the like. and preventing the user application from receiving the user interface action indicative of the data file upload operation of a source file to an upload destination (Meier, ¶14, ¶16, ¶126), wherein user action detector detects the copy or paste action from a source to destination and it gets blocked/prevented based on rules. wherein the user interface action comprises detection by the OS of a user interaction with a controller of a graphical user interface pointer and/or a pressing of one or more keys on a keyboard user interface (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 7: wherein the file upload operation comprises a data file selection (Meier, ¶124). Regarding claim 8: wherein the file upload operation comprises a data file pick (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 9: further comprising the steps of: accessing source file properties of the source file; and comparing the source file properties to the blocking criteria (Meier, ¶8-9). Regarding claim 10: wherein the user interface action indicative of the file upload operation of the source file comprises a user interaction with a controller of a graphical user interface pointer (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 11: wherein the user interface action indicative of the file upload operation of the source file comprises user interaction with a file picker configured to facilitate the user interface action (Meier, ¶61). Regarding claim 12: wherein the user interaction with the controller of the graphical user interface pointer comprises at least one of the group of a click, a click-and-release, a click-and-hold, a click-and-drag, and a click-and-drag-and-release (Meier, ¶7). Regarding claim 13: 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the controller of the graphical user interface pointer comprises one of the group consisting of a mouse, a trackpad, a track point, a track button, a track knob, and a trackball (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 14: wherein determining the user interface action is indicative of a data file upload operation of a source file to a destination file location further comprises detecting a data file pick action (Meier, ¶129). Regarding claim 15: wherein blocking at least a portion of the user interface action indicative of the data file upload operation from reaching the application comprises dropping the data file pick action (Meier, ¶6-7). Regarding claim 16: further comprising the step of informing the user of the preventing of the user application from receiving the user interface action (Meier, ¶129). Regarding claim 17: wherein: the user interface action comprises a sequence of key presses; and determining the user interface action is indicative of a data file upload operation further comprises the step of parsing the sequence of key presses (Meier, ¶7). Regarding claim 19: further comprising the step of retrieving and analyzing user session data for correlation with the data file upload operation, wherein the user session data may occur before, after, and/or concurrently with the data file upload operation (Meier, ¶20). Regarding claim 20: wherein the user session data includes at least one of the group consisting of a screenshot from the user computer, a second user interface action, a user session log, and actions on the source file prior to the first user interface action (Meier, Fig.2). Regarding claim 21: further comprising the step of transmitting the user interface action and/or the user session data to an external server (Meier, ¶78). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 7. 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 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C §103 as being unpatentable over Meier and in view of IDS provided by the applicant, Fairbairn et al. (US Publication No. 20180260534), hereinafter Fairbairn. Regarding claim 4: Meier does not explicitly suggest, wherein the user interface action further comprises recognition by the OS facial and/or body gesture recognition; however, in a same field of endeavor Fairbairn discloses this limitation (Fairbairn, ¶36, ¶31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the method of preventing data upload of Meier with the use of facial recognition disclosed in Fairbairn to maintain privacy, stated by Fairbairn at para.7. Regarding claim 18: Meier does not explicitly suggest, wherein the user interface action further comprises recognition by the OS facial and/or body gesture recognition; however, in a same field of endeavor Fairbairn discloses this limitation (Fairbairn, ¶36, ¶31). Same motivation for combining the respective features of Meier and Fairbairn applies herein, as discussed in the rejection of claim 4. Conclusion 8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Monjour Rahim whose telephone number is (571)270-3890. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shewaye Gelagay can be reached on 571-272-4219. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or CANANDA) or 571-272-1000. /Monjur Rahim/ Patent Examiner United States Patent and Trademark Office Art Unit: 2436; Phone: 571.270.3890 E-mail: monjur.rahim@uspto.gov Fax: 571.270.4890
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 29, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603913
SELECTING A TRANSMISSION PATH FOR COMMUNICATING DATA BASED ON A CLASSIFICATION FOR THE DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596807
UNIFIED EXTENSIBLE FIRMWARE INTERFACE (UEFI)-LEVEL PROCESSING OF OUT-OF-BAND COMMANDS IN HETEROGENEOUS COMPUTING PLATFORMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598458
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR SECURE COMMUNICATION WITH AND OPERATION OF AN IMPLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580742
SECURE MEMORY SYSTEM PROGRAMMING FOR HOST DEVICE VERIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574214
DISTRIBUTION AND USE OF ENCRYPTION KEYS TO DIRECT COMMUNICATIONS
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
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 879 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