Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/916,594

USING A MASKING VALUE FOR CONTACT IDENTIFICATION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 15, 2024
Examiner
YESILDAG, MEHMET
Art Unit
3624
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Funnel Leasing Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
61%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
99 granted / 294 resolved
-18.3% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
320
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
40.6%
+0.6% vs TC avg
§103
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§102
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 294 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Status of the Claims Claims 1-20 are pending and are considered below. Applicants agreed on an examiner’s amendment. Authorization for this examiner’s amendment was given in an interview with Anna Baker on 1/20/2026. Please see interview summary attachment for further details. Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101/102/103 are held in abeyance due to this agreement. 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 of U.S. Patent No. 12131296. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the reference patent anticipate claims of the pending application. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 10636016. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the reference patent anticipate claims of the pending application. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 10127527. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the reference patent anticipate claims of the pending application. Conclusion None of the prior art of record, taken individually or in combination, teach, inter alia, the claimed invention recited in claims 1 and 20 as provided in the preliminary amendment. The prior art of record most closely resembling Applicant’s claimed invention are Prevost et al (US 2013/0191481), Altscher (US 2012/0252497), Arora et al (US 2012/0089550), Lifehacker (Lifehacker.com, "Burner Generates Disposable Phone Numbers for Perfectly Private Calls and Text Messages", https://web.archive.Org/web/20120810231713/http://lifehacker.corry5933208/burner-generates-disposable-phone-numbers-for-perfectly-private-calls-and-text-messages', August 2012), Rice (US 2011/0053574), and Rukman (US 2004/0185883). None of the prior art alone or in combination teaches the limitations recited in claims 1 and 20; wherein the novelty is not in one limitation but rather in the combination of all limitations. Please refer to parent applications’ records for copies of non-patent literature documents. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHMET YESILDAG whose telephone number is (571)272-3257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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. /MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602727
INTERACTIVE DATA SYSTEM AND PROCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12554907
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BUILDING WATER-HEATING-BASED GROSS ENERGY LOAD MODIFICATION MODELING WITH THE AID OF A DIGITAL COMPUTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12443909
SYSTEM FOR MODELING THE PERFORMANCE OF FULFILMENT MACHINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12387153
USER INTERFACE FOR PRESENTING RANKED SURGE PRICING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PICKERS IN AN ONLINE CONCIERGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 12, 2025
Patent 12380461
SALES AND MARKETING ASSISTANCE SYSTEM USING PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 05, 2025
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
34%
Grant Probability
61%
With Interview (+26.9%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 294 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