Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/970,261

DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD, COMMUNICATION PROCESSING METHOD, DEVICE, AND COMMUNICATION PROCESSING PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Dec 05, 2024
Examiner
RAHMAN, SHAWNCHOY
Art Unit
2438
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Connectfree Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
670 granted / 764 resolved
+29.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
777
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§103
38.8%
-1.2% vs TC avg
§102
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 764 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION This non-final office action is in response to claims 1-26 filed April 02, 2025 for examination. Claims 1-10 were canceled and 11-26 are being examined and are pending. 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 . Preliminary Amendment Preliminary amendment to the claims, filed 04/02/2025 has been acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 12/05/2024 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. Drawings The drawings filed on 12/05/2024 have been accepted. Double Patenting The non-statutory 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 non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim either is anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim. 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); and 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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the reference 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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms, which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. eTerminal Disclaimer: 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp Claims 11-26 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of US Patent # 12,192,185 B2 (S/N # 18/423,195). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referenced US Patent and the instant application are claiming common subject matter, as follows (Since all the claims recited similar limitations, examiner only shows independent claim 1 of instant application and US Patent # 12,192,185 B2 as example in the claim comparison table): Instant Application (S/N# 18/970,261) US Patent #12,192,185 (App # 18/423,195) 11. A communication method in a network including a plurality of devices, the communication method comprising: establishing an end-to-end session between a first device and a second device; encrypting, at the first device, a packet addressed to the second device with a first encryption key associated with the end-to-end session to generate a first encrypted packet; determining whether the second device is within one hop of the first device; when the second device is within one hop of the first device, transmitting the first encrypted packet from the first device to the second device; and when the second device is not within one hop of the first device, encrypting, at the first device, the first encrypted packet with a second encryption key associated with a first adjacent node session established with a third device that is within one hop of the first device, to generate a second encrypted packet, and transmitting the second encrypted packet from the first device to the third device. 1. A communication method in a network including a plurality of devices, the communication method comprising: establishing an end-to-end session between a first device and a second device; encrypting, at the first device, a packet addressed to the second device with a first encryption key associated with the end-to-end session to generate a first encrypted packet; when direct communication between the first device and the second device is possible, transmitting the first encrypted packet from the first device to the second device; and when the direct communication between the first device and the second device is impossible: establishing, at the first device, a first adjacent node session with a third device, encrypting the first encrypted packet with a second encryption key associated with the first adjacent node session to generate a second encrypted packet, and transmitting the second encrypted packet from the first device to the third device. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11-26 would be allowable if rewritten or amended or filed terminal disclaimer to overcome the rejection under non-statutory double patenting rejection, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Independent claim 11 recites establishing an end-to-end session between a first device and a second device; encrypting, at the first device, a packet addressed to the second device with a first encryption key associated with the end-to-end session to generate a first encrypted packet; determining whether the second device is within one hop of the first device; when the second device is within one hop of the first device, transmitting the first encrypted packet from the first device to the second device; and when the second device is not within one hop of the first device, encrypting, at the first device, the first encrypted packet with a second encryption key associated with a first adjacent node session established with a third device that is within one hop of the first device, to generate a second encrypted packet, and transmitting the second encrypted packet from the first device to the third device. Other independent claim 19 and 23 recite similar limitations. Prior art US 20100115272 A1 (Batta et al.) has been found to teach, “[0036] In a conventional mesh network, when a MAP receives a packet, the MAP determines what the next hop MAP is and encrypts the payload/data portion of the packet using an encryption key shared with the next hop MAP, and then transmits the packet to the next hop MAP. For example, when MAP 120A receives a packet from the WLAN enabled client device 110 that is destined for the mesh portal 130 (or alternatively infrastructure coupled to the mesh portal 130), the MAP 120A determines what the next hop MAP is towards the mesh portal 130. The MAP 120A encrypts the payload/data portion of the packet using an encryption key shared with the next hop MAP 120B, and transmits the packet to the next hop MAP 120B. MAP 120B then receives the encrypted packet, determines what the next hop MAP 120C is towards the mesh portal 130, decrypts the packet using an encryption key that it shares with the MAP 120A, and encrypts the payload/data portion of the packet using the encryption key shared with the next hop MAP 120C, and transmits the packet to the next hop MAP 120C. ” Prior art US 8,225,083 B2 (Ganesan et al.) has been found to teach, “A method of seeding media content in a system, the method comprising: determining a next device to receive data chunks after the data chunks are received by a first device; decrypting the data chunks and re-encrypting the data chunks with a first key that enables the next device to decrypt the data chunks; causing the re-encrypted data chunks to be transmitted to the next device; and causing the next device to propagate the data chunks to a plurality of devices by (i) determining the plurality of devices to receive the data chunks, (ii) decrypting the re-encrypted data chunks, and (iii) for each of the plurality of devices to receive the data chunks, encrypting the data chunks with a second key that corresponds to each of a respective one of the plurality of devices to enable each of the plurality of devices to decrypt the data chunks.” Claim 1. The prior arts cited on the 892 and/or 1449 forms (IDS) do not fairly teach or suggest the claimed limitations, nor do they render the claimed invention obvious. The prior arts do not provide sufficient motivation to be combined and to be modified in such a way as to render obvious the claimed feature “when the second device is not within one hop of the first device, encrypting, at the first device, the first encrypted packet with a second encryption key associated with a first adjacent node session established with a third device that is within one hop of the first device, to generate a second encrypted packet, and transmitting the second encrypted packet from the first device to the third device.” in combination with “determining whether the second device is within one hop of the first device; when the second device is within one hop of the first device, transmitting the first encrypted packet from the first device to the second device” and other limitations within the context of the claimed invention as a whole without the usage of impermissible hindsight reasoning. Therefore, the examiner found the invention as claimed to be allowable. Dependent claims 12-18, 20-22, and 24-26 would also be allowable based on their dependency to allowable independent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWNCHOY RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7471. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30A-5P ET. 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, Taghi T Arani can be reached on 5712723787. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Shawnchoy Rahman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2438 .
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591637
TOKEN-BASED DATA AUTHORITY MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587523
DECENTRALIZED IDENTIFIER BASED AUTHENTICATION WITH VERIFIABLE CREDENTIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580901
Methods and Apparatuses for Secure Communication Between a First and a Second Communication Partner
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579231
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENABLING EV CHARGING SESSION WITH CHARGER DEVICE HAVING DISCONTINUOUS INTERNET CONNECTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574729
ENTERPRISE CERTIFICATE DELIVERY FOR PRIVATE 5G NETWORK AUTHENTICATION
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
88%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+0.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 764 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