Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/958,422

PROVIDING A MESSAGE BASED ON A CHANGE IN WATCH TIME

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 25, 2024
Examiner
NEWLIN, TIMOTHY R
Art Unit
2424
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Google LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
583 granted / 704 resolved
+24.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.7%
+11.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 704 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Allowable Subject Matter The claims would be allowable (but for the double patenting rejection below) because the prior art does not teach a method comprising receiving a user request for a content item, wherein the user is associated with a set of preferences or a context, then identifying a group of similar users based on the preference or context, then identifying, for each candidate content item of a group of candidate items, a difference between a first value of a measure of interaction associated with a first portion of the group of similar users after being provided the corresponding candidate item and a second value of the measure of interaction associated with a second portion of the group of similar users after having not been provided the corresponding candidate content item, and then determining a subset of the content items for which the interaction difference satisfies a criterion, identifying an activity rate for each candidate item, and finally identifying (selecting) and providing a candidate item of the subset to provide to the user based on the interaction difference, the activity rate, or context of the user. The measure of interaction is for the requested video content item, after being provided (or not) the candidate video item. Further, the interaction difference and activity rate are determined regardless of whether they are used to ultimately select a candidate item to provide to the user. The features cited above, taken together with the rest of the recited limitations, render the claims novel. Examiner is also persuaded by the applicant’s argument (in parent application 16/933750, Applicant’s Remarks dated 6/1/2021) that the claimed method is performed in response to a request for content, which the cited references do not teach (in Bramucci, for example, a promotional item is requested, rather than targeted in response to a content request). That portion of the argument is reproduced below: Specifically, Villars and Natoli do not mention receiving a request from a user to view a video content item, and hence cannot teach or describe "upon receiving the request from the user to view the video content item, identifying a first promotional video item corresponding to the video content item," as recited in amended claim 1 (emphasis added). Bramucci teaches displaying a multimedia or video to a consumer in response to the consumer clicking on an online ad. (Bramucci, [0173]). As agreed during the Examiner interview, Bramucci fails to teach or suggest "upon receiving the request from the user to view the video content item, identifying a first promotional video item corresponding to the video content item," as recited in amended claim 1 (emphasis added). Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Double Patenting Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,155,883. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claims would have been anticipated by the reference claims. Both sets of claims are directed to a method of ranking candidate content items based on comparative watch times, and one of ordinary skill would see the claims in question as obvious variants of each other. 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 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Timothy R Newlin whose telephone number is (571)270-3015. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 Mountain Time. 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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. /TIMOTHY R NEWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12579809
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICES, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODS AND VIDEO STREAMING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581028
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579630
MODULAR OPTICAL INSPECTION STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571738
Apparatus and Method for Automatic Monitoring of Lids of Beverage and Food Cans
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563262
Media System with Presentation Area Data Analysis and Segment Insertion Feature
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
83%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+13.3%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 704 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