Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/961,825

System and Method for Improving Internet Communication by Using Intermediate Nodes

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Nov 27, 2024
Priority
Aug 28, 2013 — provisional 61/870,815 +8 more
Examiner
YE, ZI
Art Unit
2455
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Bright Data Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
401 granted / 472 resolved
+27.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
489
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
82.9%
+42.9% vs TC avg
§102
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§112
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 472 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,200,084. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 12,200,084, and the U.S. Patent No. 12,200,084 and the instant application are claiming common subject matter. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-23 would be allowable if applicant overcomes the double patenting rejection(s). The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art in the field, such as Zaid (US 20110035503 A1) teaches for anonymous addressing of content stored on computers at the edge of the network. This is coupled with a system and method for the private peer-to-peer exchange of anonymously addressed content. Riise (US 20050108244 A1) teaches determining a geographical location from IP address information. Jalan (US 20050027782 A1) teaches a DNS server containing a list of peer device IDs and a multicast group address and each PE device registering with the name server. Binder (US 20120166582 A1) teaches using a plurality of intermediate relay servers to retrieve content anonymously and reconstruct requested content portions at a requesting client device. To anonymously fetching message slices from a web server using a plurality of intermediate proxy devices. The intermediate servers may be located in geographically disparate locations, such as different cities, different states, different countries or different continents. However, the prior art of record fail to explicitly teach each and every step of a method for use with a group of consumer computer devices that are each identified in the Internet using a respective Internet Protocol (IP) address, and that are each associated with a respective value, in the specific manner and combinations recited in independent claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZI YE whose telephone number is (571)270-1039. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm. 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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 5712723865. 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. /ZI YE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12639464
FILE LEAK DETECTION METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12641158
DEVICE CONNECTION METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
1y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12619717
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETECTING MALICIOUS ACTIVITY USING A MACHINE LEARNING MODEL TUNED TO A SPECIFIC ENDPOINT DEVICE
2y 4m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12603885
METHOD, RECORDING MEDIUM, AND SERVER FOR USER AUTHENTICATION BY COMPUTER
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591665
System and Method for Securing a Virtual Reality Environment
2y 7m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.4%)
2y 3m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 472 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