Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/917,218

Method and Device for Protecting Data Entered by Means of a Non-Secure User Interface

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 16, 2024
Examiner
REZA, MOHAMMAD W
Art Unit
2407
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
BANKS AND ACQUIRERS INTERNATIONAL HOLDING
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
825 granted / 943 resolved
+29.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
958
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 943 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 Claims 1-6 are presented for examination. 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 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. 3. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clayton et al hereafter Clayton (US pat. App. Pub. 20150244530) and in view of Wang et al hereafter Wang (US pat. App. Pub. 20210035340) and in further view of Paya et al hereafter Paya (US pat. App. Pub. 20160292427). 4. As per claims 1, 3, and 6, Clayton discloses a secure transmission method, a communication terminal, and a non-transitory computer-readable medium for securely transmitting data entered via a user interface of a communication terminal to a secure data processing device, the method being implemented by a module for processing the entered data comprised in the communication terminal and comprising: receiving an table from the secure processing device (paragraphs: 7, and 38, wherein it emphasizes securely transferring data entry into a user interface to a destination node wherein the entered data is encrypted by using a encryption key), receiving, from the user interface, a group of data sets comprising a data set actually entered via the user interface and a plurality of data sets, the entry whereof has been emulated by the user interface (paragraphs: 12, 23, and 37, wherein it elaborates that entering the data set thorough a user interface and another portion of data is mimic of entered data), encrypting, all of the data sets received, and transmitting all of the encrypted data sets to the secure processing device (paragraphs: 5, 14, wherein it deliberates that encrypting the received data sets by using the encryption key and transferring that encrypted data set to a secure device). Although, Clayton discusses about emulating the entry data to create the emulated data. He does not expressly disclose a group of data sets comprising a first data set actually entered via the user interface and a plurality of second data sets, the entry whereof has been emulated by the user interface. However, in the same field of endeavor, Wang discloses a group of data sets comprising a first data set actually entered via the user interface and a plurality of second data sets, the entry whereof has been emulated by the user interface (paragraphs: 11, 17, and 64). Accordingly, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the network security art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Wang’s teachings of a group of data sets comprising a first data set actually entered via the user interface and a plurality of second data sets, the entry whereof has been emulated by the user interface with the teachings of Clayton, for the purpose of effectively protecting the sets of data from unauthorized intruders. Clayton does not expressly disclose receiving an encryption table, and encrypting, via said encryption table, all of the data sets. However, in the same field of endeavor, Paya discloses receiving an encryption table, and encrypting, via said encryption table, all of the data sets (paragraphs: 34, and 43-45). Accordingly, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the network security art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Paya’s teachings of receiving an encryption table, and encrypting, via said encryption table, all of the data sets with the teachings of Clayton, for the purpose of securely encrypting the sensitive data. 5. As per claim 2, Clayton and in view of Wang and in further view of Paya discloses the secure transmission method comprising, upon receiving a message confirming a decryption of the first data set from the secure processing device, establishing communication with a processing server (Clayton, paragraphs: 11-13, wherein it deliberates that a notification will be generated to confirm the decryption of the data is completed and the communication with the server is established). 6. As per claim 4, Clayton discloses the communication terminal, further comprising a secure data processing device for securely processing the data entered via the user interface of the communication terminal, the secure data processing device comprising at least one processor configured to: transmit the encryption table to the module for processing the entered data (paragraphs: 12-14), transmit said plurality of data sets to the user interface, receive said plurality of second data sets encrypted using said encryption table in a phase during which: the data of the first data set, actually entered via the user interface and encrypted using said encryption table, are received by the secure data processing device (paragraphs: 43-46, and 50-51). Clayton does not disclose transmit said plurality of second data sets to the user interface, receive said plurality of second data sets encrypted using said encryption table in a phase during which: the data of the first data set actually entered via the user interface. However, in the same endeavor, Wang discloses transmit said plurality of second data sets to the user interface, receive said plurality of second data sets encrypted using said encryption table in a phase during which: the data of the first data set actually entered via the user interface (polarographs: 11, 17, and 64). Accordingly, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the network security art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Wang’s teachings of transmit said plurality of second data sets to the user interface, receive said plurality of second data sets encrypted using said encryption table in a phase during which: the data of the first data set actually entered via the user interface with the teachings of Clayton, for the purpose of effectively emulating second data set from the first data set. 7. As per claim 5, Clayton and in view of Wang and in further view of Paya discloses the communication terminal, wherein the user interface consists of a touch screen ((Clayton, paragraphs: 53-54). Citation of References 8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are cited but not been replied upon for this office action: Goffmann et al (US pat. app. Pub. 20140089679): discusses a computing device with cooperative first and second binary translators in first and second execution environments having first and second security levels, respectively. The second security level may be more secure than the first security level. Encrypted instructions of the computer program may be loaded into the first execution environment, and the first binary translator may provide, to the second binary translator, an execution context of the computer program for use by the secondary binary translator to decrypt and execute a first portion of the computer program in the second execution environment. Tennant et al (US pat. App. Pub. 20170090672): elaborates that a set of data associated with a touch input. The set of data includes a set of coordinates of each data point, the force applied at each data point, and the time the data for each data point is received. The method adds several data points to the first set of data points to create a second set of data points. For each data point in the second set of data points, the method calculates a set of parameters based on the set of data associated with the data point. The method provides a subset of the calculated parameters and the data associated with a subset of the second set of data to an application to emulate the input device. Conclusion 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD W REZA whose telephone number is (571)272-6590. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30-5:30 ET. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Cathy Thiaw can be reached on 571-270-1138. 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). /MOHAMMAD W REZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2407
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602486
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING AN ORGANIZATION'S RISK FOR EXPOSURE TO CYBER SECURITY EVENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603899
DEVICE ANALYTICS ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598065
MANAGING DATA ENCRYPTION DURING SYSTEM UPGRADES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592973
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SECURITY CONTROL OVER DATA FLOWS IN DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587286
Quantum Teleportation Imaging
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
88%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 943 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