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 .
Response to Amendment
1. This action is in response to the amendment filed on July 22, 2026. Claims 1-20 were previously pending consideration. Per the received amendment, claim 12 is cancelled and claim 21 is newly added.
2. Claims 1-11, and 13-21 are currently pending consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks (pages 6-16), filed on July 22, 2026, with respect to claims 1-11, and 13-21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejection of claims 1-11, and 13-21 has been withdrawn.
The Double Patenting rejection is maintained as provided below.
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.
5. Claims 1-5, 8-11, 15-18 and 21 re rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,153,655. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘655 anticipate the claims of the present application. The ‘655 Patent discloses receiving a command from a RBI service, the command comprising an instruction to issue an authentication request to an identity provider to provide access to a resource of a resource provider (present application: limitation 1: determine authentication by an identity provider is required to access a resource of a resource provider and limitation2: transmit a command to an RBI frontend of a client browser executing on a client computing device, the command causing the RBI frontend to send a client-side authentication request from the client browser to the identity provider), receive an authentication artifact from an access service (limitation 3: receive an authentication artifact from the client browser), and transmit the authentication artifact to the RBI service (limitation 4: provide the authentication artifact to a resource provider). The dependent claims 2-7 are substantially disclosed by the ‘655 Patent or are obvious variations. Claims 2-4 delineate the type of authentication artifact is being transmitted which are disclosed by claims 4 and 5 of the ‘655 Patent. Claim 5 discloses that the command is sent without the state information so the RBI frontend can determine the state information. This is disclosed by claim 13 of the ‘655 Patent.
6. Claims 6-7, 13-14, and 19-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,153,655 in view of Zeller et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. US 2022/0353262).
The ‘655 Patent is silent on providing the URLs of the identity providers. In an analogous art, Zeller discloses receiving identity provider integration information including a URL (paragraph 0017), and authentication request parameters or available algorithms (paragraph 0017). Zeller further discloses that the authentication system may request authentication of users by the third-party identity provider through an authentication integration with the third-party identity provider based on information in the access request (paragraph 0020). It would have been obvious to incorporate the identity provider integration system of Zeller into the system of the ‘655 Patent to provide an efficient process for providing authentication integrations with identity providers request by client systems (Zeller: see Abstract).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEH ABRISHAMKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3786. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30.
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, Jung Kim can be reached at 571-272-3804. 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.
/KAVEH ABRISHAMKAR/
09/14/2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights