Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/938,099

OBTAINING DATA FROM INCOMPLETE ELECTRONIC FORMS

Non-Final OA §102§DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Nov 05, 2024
Priority
Nov 25, 2013 — provisional 61/908,349 +12 more
Examiner
KELLS, ASHER
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Mov-Ology LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
512 granted / 649 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
661
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.2%
+0.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 649 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION Status of the Claims Claim 1 is pending. 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 C.F.R. § 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 C.F.R. § 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(I)(B)(1). For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 C.F.R. § 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. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,280,531, 9,286,282, 9,589,281, 10,042,838, and 10,769,358. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claim is generic to a species or sub-genus claimed in the aforementioned patents (i.e., the entire scope of the present claim falls within the scope of one or more of the claims of the aforementioned patents). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greenberg, US 2003/0144925 A1. Regarding claim 1, Greenberg teaches a method to obtain data from abandoned electronic forms, the method comprising: Determining that an electronic form accessed by a user has been abandoned by the user. Greenberg ¶ 52. Obtaining data from the abandoned electronic form. Greenberg ¶ 52. Using the obtained data. Greenberg teaches using obtained data to create an email. Greenberg ¶ 53. Conclusion Although particular portions of the prior art may have been cited in support of the rejections, the specified citations are merely representative of the teachings. Other passages and figures in the cited prior art may apply. Accordingly, Applicant should consider the entirety of the cited prior art for potentially teaching all or part of the claims. The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Marchese et al., US 2008/0195476 A1, discloses collecting data when a user abandons a web page. Clucas, US 2009/0193116 A1, discloses capturing data when a user leaves a page of a user interface. Teeter, US 2005/0278231 A1, discloses saving shopping cart and associated consumer information if the shopping cart is abandoned. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Asher D Kells whose telephone number is (571)270-7729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 8 a.m. - 4 p.m.. 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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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. Asher D. Kells Primary Examiner Art Unit 2171 /Asher D Kells/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 05, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12743201
Scroller Interface for Transcription Navigation
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12737530
SYSTEM AND METHOD USING GLOBAL AND LOCAL-AWARE DENOISING FRAMEWORK FOR COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE GRAPH NOISE DETECTION
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12737535
COMMENT PROCESSING METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 5m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12730616
INTEGRATED USER INTERFACE PLATFORM DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD OF SINGLE-PAGE APPLICATION TYPE
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12718308
Systems and Methods of Tracking Chain of Custody of Documents
2y 3m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+11.6%)
2y 6m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 649 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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