Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/911,633

DETECTING DATA EXFILTRATION AND COMPROMISED USER ACCOUNTS IN A COMPUTING NETWORK

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 10, 2024
Examiner
GYORFI, THOMAS A
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
517 granted / 687 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
707
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
§112
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 687 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/24, 1/31/25, and 4/21/25 have been 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 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,166,780. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘780 patent anticipate those of the instant application. By way of illustration, consider the respective claim 1 from each disclosure: Claim 1 of the instant application Claim 1 of the ‘780 patent 1. A network monitoring platform comprising: a processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the processor; and one or more memories comprising a user profile database and storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the network monitoring platform to: monitor outgoing data, associated with a plurality of domain categories, from a user device to an external network; count, in the outgoing data and in a first time period, respective actual quantities of requests, by the user device, to each of the plurality of domain categories; predict, based on a user profile in the user profile database and associated with the user device, respective expected quantities of requests, by the user device, to each of the plurality of domain categories in the first time period; identify the outgoing data as anomalous based on a distribution of the expected quantities of requests and a distribution of the actual quantities of requests associated with the plurality of domain categories; and send, via the communication interface and based on the identifying the outgoing data as anomalous, a notification. 1. A system for detecting and blocking data exfiltration, from a user device, associated with a computing network, to an external network, the system comprising: the external network comprising a malicious actor device; the user device communicatively coupled to the external network and configured to send data over the computing network to at least the malicious actor device; and a network monitoring platform on the computing network, communicatively coupled to the user device and the external network, the network monitoring platform comprising: a processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the processor; and one or more memories comprising a user profile database and storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the network monitoring platform to: monitor outgoing data, associated with a plurality of domain categories, from the user device to the external network; count, in the outgoing data for a first time period, respective actual quantities of requests by the user device to each of the plurality of domain categories, without inspecting webpage content; predict, based on a user profile associated with the user device that is stored in the user profile database, respective expected quantities of requests to each of the plurality of domain categories by the user device for the first time period; identify anomalies in the outgoing data of the user device based on a distribution of the expected quantities of requests and a distribution of the actual quantities of requests associated with the plurality of domain categories; and send, via the communication interface and based on the identified anomalies, a notification to disconnect the user device, wherein disconnecting the user device comprises blocking the outgoing data from the user device to the external network, wherein the identifying of the anomalies, by the network monitoring platform, is based on deviation from a mean, deviation exceeding a multiple of a standard deviation, and deviation from an upper or lower limit of an interquartile range. As can be seen, all the limitations of instant claim 1 are present in the corresponding claim 1 of the ‘780 patent; thus any invention that would infringe on the ‘780 patent would also necessarily infringe the instant application, resulting in two patents on the same invention. Independent claims 10 and 19 of the instant application are likewise similar to independent claims 9 and 17 of the ‘780 patent and are likewise rejected for substantially similar reasons as discussed supra. Dependent claims 2-9, 11-18, and 20 of the instant application are likewise similar to dependent claims 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 of the ‘780 patent and are likewise rejected for substantially similar reasons as discussed supra. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 are allowable over the prior art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A GYORFI whose telephone number is (571)272-3849. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00am - 6:30pm. 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, Joseph Hirl can be reached at 571-272-3685. 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. THOMAS A. GYORFI Examiner Art Unit 2435 /THOMAS A GYORFI/Examiner, Art Unit 2435 2/18/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 10, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587557
DETECTION METHOD OF NETWORK ANOMALY AND ANOMALY DETECTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579278
AD-HOC GRAPH PROCESSING FOR SECURITY EXPLAINABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568101
NETWORK ANOMALY DETECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563032
CHAT-BOT ASSISTED AUTHENTICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556578
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING AND PREVENTING MALFEASANT ACTIVITY IN A PRIVATE DISTRIBUTED NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
75%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+16.8%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 687 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