Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/890,937

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRACKING AND ILLUSTRATING USER ACTIVITY IN A NETWORK ENVIRONMENT

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Sep 20, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, ANH
Art Unit
2458
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Match Group LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
282 granted / 359 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
382
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
§103
58.6%
+18.6% vs TC avg
§102
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
§112
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 359 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 . This communication is in response to the application filed on 09/20/2024. Claims 21-40 are pending and are rejected. Claims 1-20 have been canceled. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/14/2025, 04/07/2025, and 05/07/2025 were filed. The submission 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 double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue 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 reference 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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claim 21-40 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7-12, 15, and 18 of Patent No. 12107932. Present Application 18/890937 Co-pending Application Patent No. 12107932 Claims 21, 28, and 35 providing, to a first user of an online dating service, a view of a profile including a photo, the profile being of a second user in the online dating service; soliciting the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service; providing a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee; and delivering a communication from the first user to the second user via the online dating service. Claims 24, 37, and 31 wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to communicate more frequently with the second user, at least in part based on the fee. Claims 27, 34, and 40 wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to receive preferential positioning in the context of being matched to the second user, at least in part based on the fee. Claims 1, 8, and 15 creating a first profile for a user in an online dating service; providing, to the user, a view of a second profile, the second profile including a photo and being of another user in the online dating service; soliciting the user to pay a fee for the online dating service; permitting the user to receive preferential positioning in the context of being matched to the other user, at least in part based on the fee; delivering a communication with the other user's profile; and permitting the user to communicate more frequently with the other user, at least in part based on the fee. Claims 22, 29, and 36 the communication is defined by a message. Claims 2 and 9 delivering a message to the other user via the online dating service. Claims 23 and 30 the fee is for a subscription-based service. Claims 3 and 10 the online dating service includes a subscription-based service. Claims 25, 38, and 32 the feature is defined by providing an additional match to the first user, at least in part based on the fee . Claims 4, 7, and 11 providing an additional match to the user, at least in part based on the fee. Claims 26, 33, and 39 the feature is defined by permitting the first user to target a search based on a criterion, at least in part based on the fee. Claims 5, 12, and 18 permitting the user to target a search based on a criterion, at least in part based on the fee. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed subject matter of the present applicant and that of Patent No. 12107932 are substantially the same and the claimed subject matter of the present application would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the claimed subject matter of Patent No. 12107932. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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 21-23 , 28-30, 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20150058423 A1 ), hereafter Chen in view of Khaef et al. (US 20140372290 A1), hereafter Khaef. Regarding claim 21, Chen teaches a method, comprising: providing, to a first user of an online dating service, a view of a profile including a photo, the profile being of a second user in the online dating service ([0044], fig. 1, the action logger 146 populates the activity log 142 with information about user actions. Any action that a particular user takes with respect to another node on the social networking system 130 may be associated with each user's profile, through information maintained in the activity log 142; [0082] notifications concerning the photos category may be provided to the user when, for example, the user is "tagged" in a photo, another comments on a photo in which the user appears or is "tagged", the user uploads a photo to the social networking website); delivering a communication from the first user to the second user via the online dating service [0069] if User A and User B are friends, there may be an additional path that indirectly connects User A to the article through User B, who posted the article; ([0072] how often User A views the profile or content associated with User B may be determined and expressed as an observation coefficient). Chen does not explicitly teach soliciting the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service; and providing a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee. Khaef teaches soliciting the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service ([0073] A sponsor may offer the (online dating) site a discount or special offer for users that pre-purchase gift certificates); and providing a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee ([0102] acknowledger may be required to pay a small fee to accept (i.e., acknowledge) the invitation from Initiator (the first user); It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a fee dating system, as taught by Khaef. One would be motivated to do so for enhanced user experience and lead to more revenue generation opportunities for operators and advertising sponsors of such sites. Regarding claims 22, 29, and 36, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21, 28, and 35, wherein Chen further teaches the communication is defined by a message ([0042] The web server may include a mail server or other messaging functionality for receiving and routing messages between the social networking system and one or more user devices). Regarding claims 23 and 30, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21 and 28, wherein Khaef further teaches the fee is for a subscription-based service ([0037] an application service provider--an individual person, business, or other entity--may allow access, on a free registration, paid subscriber). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a fee for a subscription, as taught by Khaef. One would be motivated to do so for enhanced user experience and lead to more revenue generation opportunities for operators and advertising sponsors of such sites. Regarding claim 28, Chen teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable medium that includes code for execution and that, when executed by a processor, is operable to perform operations comprising: providing, to a first user of an online dating service, a view of a profile including a photo, the profile being of a second user in the online dating service ([0044] The action logger 146 populates the activity log 142 with information about user actions. Any action that a particular user takes with respect to another node on the social networking system 130 may be associated with each user's profile, through information maintained in the activity log 142; [0082] notifications concerning the photos category may be provided to the user when, for example, the user is "tagged" in a photo, another comments on a photo in which the user appears or is "tagged", the user uploads a photo to the social networking website); delivering a communication from the first user to the second user via the online dating service ([0069] if User A and User B are friends, there may be an additional path that indirectly connects User A to the article through User B, who posted the article; [0072] how often User A views the profile or content associated with User B may be determined and expressed as an observation coefficient). Chen does not explicitly teach soliciting the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service; and providing a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee. Khaef teaches soliciting the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service ([0073] A sponsor may offer the (online dating) site a discount or special offer for users that pre-purchase gift certificates); and providing a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee ([0102] acknowledger may be required to pay a small fee to accept (i.e., acknowledge) the invitation from Initiator (the first user); It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a fee dating system, as taught by Khaef. Regarding claim 35, Chen teaches an apparatus, comprising: a memory that stores at least one instruction; and a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction to cause the apparatus to provide, to a first user of an online dating service, a view of a profile including a photo, the profile being of a second user in the online dating service ([0044] The action logger 146 populates the activity log 142 with information about user actions. Any action that a particular user takes with respect to another node on the social networking system 130 may be associated with each user's profile, through information maintained in the activity log 142; [0082] notifications concerning the photos category may be provided to the user when, for example, the user is "tagged" in a photo, another comments on a photo in which the user appears or is "tagged", the user uploads a photo to the social networking website) deliver a communication from the first user to the second user via the online dating service ([0069] if User A and User B are friends, there may be an additional path that indirectly connects User A to the article through User B, who posted the article; [0072] how often User A views the profile or content associated with User B may be determined and expressed as an observation coefficient). Chen does not explicitly teach solicit the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service; provide a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee; and solicit the first user to pay a fee for the online dating service ([0073] A sponsor may offer the (online dating) site a discount or special offer for users that pre-purchase gift certificates); and provide a feature to the first user on the online dating service, at least in part based on the fee ([0102] acknowledger may be required to pay a small fee to accept (i.e., acknowledge) the invitation from Initiator (the first user); It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a fee dating system, as taught by Khaef. One would be motivated to do so for enhanced user experience and lead to more revenue generation opportunities for operators and advertising sponsors of such sites. Claims 24-25, 37-38, and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Khaef and further in view of Giordani et al. (US 8332418 B1), hereafter Giordani. Regarding claims 24, 37, and 31, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21, 35, and 28, Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to communicate more frequently with the second user, at least in part based on the fee. Giordani teaches wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to communicate more frequently with the second user, at least in part based on the fee (col. 3, lines 19-21, a matching service agrees to provide 10 matches and additional matches can be made for additional fees). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, an addition fee after user exceeds the free service, as taught by Giordani. One would be motivated to do so to maintain the processes and databases for a number of different users, or it may represent a distributed set of computers located in different geographic regions, each serving a different group of users. Regarding claims 25, 38, and 32, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21, 28, and 35, Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the feature is defined by providing an additional match to the first user, at least in part based on the fee. Giordani teaches wherein the feature is defined by providing an additional match to the first user, at least in part based on the fee (col. 3, lines 20-21, additional matches can be made for additional fees). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, an addition fee after user exceeds the free service, as taught by Giordani. One would be motivated to do so to maintain the processes and databases for a number of different users, or it may represent a distributed set of computers located in different geographic regions, each serving a different group of users. Claims 26-27, 33-34, and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of in view of Khaef and further in view of Thomas (US 20110252340 A1). Regarding claims 26, 33, and 39, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21, 28, and 35, Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to target a search based on a criterion, at least in part based on the fee. Thomas teaches the feature is defined by permitting the first user to target a search based on a criterion, at least in part based on the fee ([0094] once an account is set up and the required membership fee is paid, the user is then allowed to begin his/her search). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a membership fee to search for other members, as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to do so to maintain the processes and databases for a number of different users, or it may represent a distributed set of computers located in different geographic regions, each serving a different group of users. Regarding claims 27, 34, and 40, Chen and Khaef teach all limitations of parent claims 21, 28, and 35, Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to receive preferential positioning in the context of being matched to the second user, at least in part based on the fee. Thomas teaches wherein the feature is defined by permitting the first user to receive preferential positioning in the context of being matched to the second user, at least in part based on the fee ([0071] As indicated, certain witnesses may be granted a limited membership, e.g., without search or hosting capabilities or other capabilities, but with a free or discounted membership to watch auditions or dates open to the public, limited public, or designated group, and so on). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Chen disclosure, a membership fee to search for other members, as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to do so to maintain the processes and databases for a number of different users, or it may represent a distributed set of computers located in different geographic regions, each serving a different group of users. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Leibu (US 8478757 B2) and Pierce (US 8458153 B2). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 5712703037. 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. /ANH NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 20, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602480
DATA MANAGEMENT APPARATUS AND DATA MANAGEMENT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603908
SYSTEM FOR DETECTING ANOMALOUS NETWORK PATTERNS BASED ON ANALYZING NETWORK TRAFFIC DATA AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587558
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ASSISTED CYBER THREAT IDENTIFICATION VIA WEBSERVER LOGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578895
USING NETWORK DEVICE REPLICATION IN DISTRIBUTED STORAGE CLUSTERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581310
PAIRING OF USER DEVICE WITH REMOTE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
99%
With Interview (+24.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 359 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