Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/945,881

DEVICE AND PROCESS FOR EXECUTING CYBERSECURITY FUNCTIONS AND SAFETY FUNCTIONS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 13, 2024
Examiner
ZEE, EDWARD
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
DRÄGERWERK AG & CO. KGAA
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
812 granted / 895 resolved
+32.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
909
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§103
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 895 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This is in response to the correspondence filed on 11/13/24. Claims 1-20 are still pending and have been considered below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-10 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 1 and 15 recite “…wherein the first computing unit and the second computing unit are data exchange connected to one another…”, which render the claims indefinite in that they appear to contain grammatical and/or idiomatic errors. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the third computing unit" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hickey et al. (2020/0261673). Claim 1: Hickey et al. discloses a device for executing cybersecurity functions with respect to information security and safety functions with respect to operational safety, the device comprising: a first computing unit configured to execute at least one of the cybersecurity functions, the first computing unit comprising a communication module which has a first interface and is configured to check incoming data(remote server performs a variety of security functions, such as generating/providing a nonce, computing a signing key, computing authorization codes, authenticating the therapy data by comparing the authorization codes) [pages 2-3, paragraph 0026 | page 5, paragraph 0050]; a second computing unit configured to execute at least one of the safety functions, the second computing unit comprising an alarm module which is configured to generate an information signal(RT device configured to send data relating to the respiratory therapy, such as time of usage, number of respiratory events, compliance rule evaluation results) [page 2, paragraph 0022 | pages 10-11, paragraph 0136]; and a second interface configured for data exchange between the first computing unit and the second computing unit, wherein the first computing unit and the second computing unit are data exchange connected to one another via the second interface(RT devices are connected to remote server through corresponding control devices) [page 10, paragraph 0135 | figure 6]. Claim 2: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the first computing unit is configured to access a first data memory, and the second computing unit is configured to access a second data memory [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 3: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 2, wherein the first data memory and the second data memory are comprised by a data storage medium with the first data memory and the second data memory being non-overlapping or are comprised by separate data storage media that are not shared by the first and second computing units [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 4: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the first computing unit is configured to execute the at least one cybersecurity function independently of the second computing unit and the second computing unit is configured to execute the at least one safety function independently of the first computing unit(RT devices and remote server each have a corresponding processor to execute respective functions separately from one another) [figure 6]. Claim 5: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the second computing unit comprises a sensor module for recording sensor data [page 8, paragraph 0084]. Claim 6: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the first computing unit and/or the second computing unit comprises a memory module for managing data on a data storage medium [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 7: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, further comprising a third computing unit, wherein the third computing unit comprises a user interaction module for inputting and/or outputting information [page 2, paragraphs 0024-0025]. Claim 8: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 6, wherein the third computing unit is connected to the first computing unit and/or second computing unit for data exchange [page 10, paragraph 0135 | figure 6]. Claim 9: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the device is comprised by a gas measuring device [page 2, paragraph 0021 | page 18, paragraph 0213]. Claim 10: Hickey et al. discloses a device according to claim 1, wherein the device is comprised by a ventilator or an anesthesia device [page 2, paragraph 0022]. Claim 11: Hickey et al. discloses a process for executing cybersecurity functions with respect to information security and safety functions with respect to operational safety on a device comprising a first computing unit and a second computing unit, the process comprising the steps of: receiving and checking data with a communication module of the first computing unit [pages 2-3, paragraph 0026 | page 5, paragraph 0050]; storing the data in a first data memory and/or transmitting the data to the second computing unit [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124], evaluating the data relating to an alarm situation with an alarm module of the second computing unit [page 2, paragraph 0022 | pages 10-11, paragraph 0136]; and generating an information signal by the alarm module [page 2, paragraph 0022 | pages 10-11, paragraph 0136]. Clam 12: Hickey et al. discloses a process according to claim 11, further comprising the steps of: determining a sensor measured value with a sensor module of the second computing unit(time of usage, number of respiratory events); and evaluating the sensor measured value with regard to an alarm situation by the alarm module(time of usage, number of respiratory events, compliance rule evaluation) [page 2, paragraph 0022 | pages 10-11, paragraph 0136]. Claim 13: Hickey et al. discloses a process according to claim 11, further comprising the step of storing information of the second computing unit in a second data memory, wherein the second data memory and the first data memory are non-overlapping [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 14: Hickey et al. discloses a process according to claim 11, further comprising the step of receiving and/or outputting information with a user interaction module of a third computing unit of the device [page 2, paragraphs 0024-0025]. Claim 15: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device comprising: a device for executing cybersecurity functions with respect to information security and safety functions with respect to operational safety, the device comprising: a first computing unit configured to execute at least one of the cybersecurity functions, the first computing unit comprising a communication module which has a first interface and is configured to check incoming data [pages 2-3, paragraph 0026 | page 5, paragraph 0050]; a second computing unit configured to execute at least one of the safety functions, the second computing unit comprising an alarm module which is configured to generate an information signal [page 2, paragraph 0022 | pages 10-11, paragraph 0136]; and a second interface configured for data exchange between the first computing unit and the second computing unit, wherein the first computing unit and the second computing unit are data exchange connected to one another via the second interface [page 10, paragraph 0135 | figure 6]. Claim 16: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device according to claim 15, wherein the first computing unit is configured to access a first data memory and the second computing unit is configured to access a second data memory [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 17: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device according to claim 16, wherein the first computing unit and/or the second computing unit comprises a memory module for managing data on a data storage medium or on data storage media, wherein the first data memory and the second data memory are comprised by the data storage medium or the data storage media with the first data memory and the second data memory being non-overlapping or are comprised by separate data storage media that are not shared by the respective memory module [page 22, paragraphs 0319-0320 | page 9, paragraphs 0121-0124]. Claim 18: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device according to claim 15, wherein the first computing unit is configured to execute the at least one cybersecurity function independently of the second computing unit and the second computing unit is configured to execute the at least one safety function independently of the first computing unit [figure 6]. Claim 19: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device according to claim 15, wherein the second computing unit comprises a sensor module for recording sensor data [page 8, paragraph 0084]. Claim 20: Hickey et al. discloses a gas measuring device according to claim 15, further comprising a third computing unit, wherein the third computing unit comprises a user interaction module for inputting and/or outputting information and wherein the third computing unit is connected to the first computing unit and/or second computing unit for data exchange [page 2, paragraphs 0024-0025]. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Freeman et al. (2017/0325091). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD ZEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1686. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST. 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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at (571) 270-3351. 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. /EDWARD ZEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 13, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603769
Time-Coordinated Address Rotation
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603756
FULLY HOMOMORPHIC ENCRYPTED PROCESSING ACCELERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587842
KEY UPDATE METHOD, NETWORK DEVICE, SYSTEM, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580970
COMPUTERIZED SECURITY PLATFORMS INCLUDING A ROLE-BASED PERMISSIONS SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574243
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EMAIL-BASED CARD ACTIVATION
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
91%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 895 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