Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/934,760

AUTOMATED OPT-IN CONVERSATION SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 01, 2024
Examiner
ZONG, RUOLEI
Art Unit
2441
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Liveperson Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
814 granted / 938 resolved
+28.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
953
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 938 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION The non-final office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment to U.S. Patent Application 18/934,760 on 06/18/2025. Claims 2-22 are pending; claims 2-22 are rejected. 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 . 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 2-22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,166,732 B2 (hereinafter P732) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0281030 A1 to ISAACSON et al. (hereinafter ISAACSON). Claim 2 of the Instant Application Claim 1 of P732 A computer-implemented method, comprising: A computer-implemented method comprising: monitoring ongoing messages exchanged during a communications session between a user and an agent bot to detect an intent that corresponds to an opportunity to present an opt-in authorization request for supplemental communications; dynamically detecting ongoing messages exchanged in real-time during a first communications session between a user and an agent bot; processing the ongoing messages in real-time as the ongoing messages are received to automatically determine whether to present an opt-in authorization request for supplemental communications, wherein the opt-in authorization request includes a prompt for contact information associated with the user; processing the intent and user information through a trained machine learning algorithm to processing the ongoing messages in real-time as the ongoing messages are received to automatically determine whether to present an opt-in authorization request for supplemental communications, wherein the opt-in authorization request includes a prompt for contact information associated with the user; providing the opt-in authorization request and generating an instruction to present the opt-in authorization request, wherein when the instruction is received by the agent bot, the agent bot presents the opt-in authorization request through the first communications session; monitoring new ongoing messages exchanged during the communications session to detect approval of the opt-in authorization request and monitoring the first communications session in real-time to detect approval of the opt-in authorization request and a message including the contact information associated with the user; facilitating an alternative communications session between the user and an integration bot, wherein when the alternative communications session is facilitated, the integration bot communicates an opt-in confirmation request through the alternative communications session; facilitating a second communications session according to the contact information, wherein when the second communication session is facilitated, an integration bot transmits an opt-in confirmation request through the second communications session; detecting an opt-in confirmation responsive to the opt-in confirmation request, wherein when the opt-in confirmation is detected, the supplemental communications are provided; and receiving in real-time an opt-in confirmation responsive to the opt-in confirmation request through the second communications session; and providing the approval of the opt-in authorization request and the opt-in confirmation, wherein when the approval of the opt-in authorization request and the opt-in confirmation are received by a brand entity, the brand entity transmits the supplemental communications. Claim 1 of P732 does not explicitly disclose the claim limitation identified above. Ref2 discloses to provide incentive and recommendation to user based on historical data (Artificial intelligence and/or machine learning approaches can also be utilized to characterize user shopping and navigation history with respect to their buying habits such that the shopping cart could be populated with only those items having a threshold probability of the user actually purchasing, ref2, [0073], [0095]-[0096], [0260]) and to utilize user’s data to train machine learning algorithm (For example, location, age, income level, purchasing habits, social media data, browsing history, in-store purchasing history or other in-store data, types of accounts the user uses, how much money is in a user account or accounts, or other information about the user can be provided to a site such that the data can be incorporated into the decision making process of how to present a payment button, how to modify the payment flow for that user, or how to present a user interface for managing product identification and purchasing for in-store shopping. Machine learning, artificial intelligence, rule-based logic, or any other such approach can utilize training data with respect to how users react to payment flows to dynamically present a particular flow or user interface for a particular user such that their experience can be consistent across payment platforms, ref2, [0367], [0080]-[008], [0116], [0244]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to train machine learning algorithm as taught by ref2 to modify the method of claim 1 of P732 in order to guide a user around the store to purchase products, handle the product not in stock if it is still desired, or to up sell, or to accessorize product that they desire to purchase. As to claims 3-22, claims 1-21 of P732 in view of ref2 obviously disclose all limitations in claims 3-21 of the instant application. Claims 3-22 of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-22 are allowable over prior art references on record. Note: the rejection on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting needs to be overcome in order to allow the case. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art references on record do not disclose “providing the opt-in authorization request and the one or more incentives through the communications session; monitoring new ongoing messages exchanged during the communications session to detect approval of the opt-in authorization request and the one or more incentives; facilitating an alternative communications session between the user and an integration bot, wherein when the alternative communications session is facilitated, the integration bot communicates an opt-in confirmation request through the alternative communications session; detecting an opt-in confirmation responsive to the opt-in confirmation request, wherein when the opt-in confirmation is detected, the supplemental communications are provided; and updating the trained machine learning algorithm based on the one or more incentives and the opt-in confirmation.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUOLEI ZONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7522. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM IFP. 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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571)272-7304. 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. /RUOLEI ZONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449 3/4/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596506
Storage System Cloning
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591701
USER STEERING THROUGH WORKSPACE ORCHESTRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592983
LOCAL DEVICE IDENTIFIERS IN A STORAGE NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580857
Maintaining IP/MAC Association Using ARP Scanning And Spoofing
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574282
NETWORK COMPONENT EVENTS WITH APPLICATION GRAPH DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 938 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