Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/974,758

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING SECURITY USING MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 09, 2024
Examiner
PONTIUS, JAMES M
Art Unit
2488
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
404 granted / 514 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
531
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§103
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 514 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “computing device” in claims 1-15, “security device” in claim 1-4 and 15 as well as “secondary security device” in claims 2-4. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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 1-20 is/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, 16 and 19 recites the limitation “said content.” In claim 1, two different types of content have been previously set forth and it is unclear which of these two is the “said content.” In claims 16 and 19, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. The dependent claims inherit this deficiency by virtue of their dependency. 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(s) 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campero et al. (US 9,858,781). Regarding claim 16, Campero discloses: A method for managing security on a premises, comprising: determining an identity of a user accessing a user profile via a user interface of a control board (Campero: col 14, line 33-40; Referring now also to FIG. 13B, the security application 188 causes the security system to continually or periodically issue 222, a beacon, e.g., an electronic signal that is readable by the user device 12a. The security application receives 224 the user's public key. A security wallet 201 of the security application sends 226 a QR code that has a facility public key), retrieving said user profile having user data that pertains to said identity (Campero: col 14, line 40-44; The security application receives 228 the user's profile corresponding the user associated with the device 12a. Upon receiving the user profile, the security application 188 sends 228 a message to distributed networked servers to search for the user via the distributed ledger 14; col 14, line 53-60; the security application 188 sends the received profile over a network to verify 236 the profile and selects an identity type, e.g., employee or guest. The security system sends 236 produced/updated user identity to the distributed ledger 14, along with the received public key and user type (e.g., employee, guest) over a distributed network to the distributed ledger system 14 where the profile, public key of the user and the user type are stored), transmitting a permission level of said user profile to said control board (Campero: col 14, line 53-60; employee or guest), determining to which said content said user has access based on said permission level (Campero: col 14, line 1-5; The registration process flow 200 also allows the access control system to verify the identity of the user possessing the mobile credential for permitting registration for access to the facility (or facilities)), determining, via a machine learning technique, a security status based on security data (Campero: col 10, line 59-60; user's broker system 16 returns 88 the score(s) and status back to the third party system 18; col 17, line 39-41; (OCSP) or “Online Certificate Status Protocol” is an Internet protocol used for obtaining revocation status of an X.509 digital certificate), adjusting, via a machine learning technique, said security status based on said security data (Campero: col 18, line 34-60; Although the certificate is authentic the wallet needs to verify that the certificate has not been revoked. The wallet can do this verification a number of ways, as discussed above. Upon, the guest's wallet 13a verifying the facility credentials, e.g., facility certificate, a revocation status and facility UUID, the guest's wallet sends 610 a JWT message to the door kiosk app), presenting, via a display, said security status within a plurality of display windows (Campero: col 30, line 48 – col 31, line 2; FIG. 24A shows an initial interface 800 rendered on a display of the user device 12a, e.g., a smartphone, to initialize the wallet 13a. The initial interface 800 has fields for entering user information, e.g., first name, last name, e-mail, and password, and which displays a wallet ID and the user's public key. The interface 800 also includes a button to register the user/user's wallet 13a with the various systems described above and that invoke the processes of FIGS. 12-13C. FIG. 24B shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during a log-in presenting the e-mail and password fields that the user filled in, along with a log-in button. FIGS. 24C and 24D show the user interface 800 at a later stage for creating the QR codes with a generate button and scanning of the QR codes with a scan button, as mentioned in FIG. 12. FIG. 24E shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during sending of the profile to the security app., with a send profile button and a check box to approve sending profile information. FIG. 24F depicts a confirmation of registration status message), presenting, via said display, said security data within said plurality of display windows (Campero: col 30, line 48 – col 31, line 2; FIG. 24A shows an initial interface 800 rendered on a display of the user device 12a, e.g., a smartphone, to initialize the wallet 13a. The initial interface 800 has fields for entering user information, e.g., first name, last name, e-mail, and password, and which displays a wallet ID and the user's public key. The interface 800 also includes a button to register the user/user's wallet 13a with the various systems described above and that invoke the processes of FIGS. 12-13C. FIG. 24B shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during a log-in presenting the e-mail and password fields that the user filled in, along with a log-in button. FIGS. 24C and 24D show the user interface 800 at a later stage for creating the QR codes with a generate button and scanning of the QR codes with a scan button, as mentioned in FIG. 12. FIG. 24E shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during sending of the profile to the security app., with a send profile button and a check box to approve sending profile information. FIG. 24F depicts a confirmation of registration status message), organizing, via said control board, said plurality of display windows based on adjustments to said security status or said security data (Campero: col 30, line 48 – col 31, line 2; FIG. 24A shows an initial interface 800 rendered on a display of the user device 12a, e.g., a smartphone, to initialize the wallet 13a. The initial interface 800 has fields for entering user information, e.g., first name, last name, e-mail, and password, and which displays a wallet ID and the user's public key. The interface 800 also includes a button to register the user/user's wallet 13a with the various systems described above and that invoke the processes of FIGS. 12-13C. FIG. 24B shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during a log-in presenting the e-mail and password fields that the user filled in, along with a log-in button. FIGS. 24C and 24D show the user interface 800 at a later stage for creating the QR codes with a generate button and scanning of the QR codes with a scan button, as mentioned in FIG. 12. FIG. 24E shows the user interface 800 at a later stage, e.g., during sending of the profile to the security app., with a send profile button and a check box to approve sending profile information. FIG. 24F depicts a confirmation of registration status message). Regarding claim 19, Campero discloses the CRM limitations of this claim as discussed above with respect to claim 16 (Campero: col 31, line 12-27). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Claims 17-18 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M PONTIUS whose telephone number is (571)270-7687. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-4. 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, Sath V Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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. /JAMES M PONTIUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 09, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602934
VEHICULAR DRIVING ASSIST SYSTEM WITH TRAFFIC LIGHT RECOGNITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587726
ELECTRIC SHAVER WITH IMAGING CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583389
SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING THREE-DIMENSIONAL IMAGE OF VEHICLE AND VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583400
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A VEHICLE ACCESS POINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587616
IMAGE CAPTURING SYSTEM AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
79%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 514 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month