Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 27, 2026
Application No. 18/986,459

CONTROLLING USER CREATION OF DATA RESOURCES ON A DATA PROCESSING PLATFORM

Final Rejection §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Dec 18, 2024
Priority
Oct 04, 2017 — GB 1716170.4 +5 more
Examiner
HOFFMAN, BRANDON S
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Palantir Technologies Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
1158 granted / 1279 resolved
+32.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1300
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
§103
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1279 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action. Applicant’s arguments, filed August 13, 2026, have been considered and are persuasive. However, the double patenting rejection remains. A Terminal Disclaimer fee has been paid, but the actual document does not appear to be filed. 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,206,669. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both application and patent have similar claims. Instant application Managing one or more replicas of an application; Creating an annotation resource that includes one or more annotations; Creating an ingress resource for a specific annotation…the specific annotation being in a specification for the application; Receiving a request to access the application…matching the specific annotation; Routing the request to a replica…based on the ingress resource; Patent Creating a version of the data resource…for deployment on the software platform; Identifying one or more annotations in the data resource specification; Providing the launch function with said information [based on annotations]; Receiving from a user a user request…identifying a specification; Route access requests by external users to the one or more replicas; Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON HOFFMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3863. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571)272-6798. 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. /BRANDON HOFFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2024
Application Filed
May 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT
Aug 13, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12769859
TECHNIQUES FOR MANAGING DIGITAL MEDIA ITEM DELIVERY QUEUES
2y 4m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12769861
VEHICLE CONTROL SYSTEM, ACCESS CONTROL DEVICE, AND ACCESS CONTROL METHOD
2y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12769882
ON DEVICE-BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SUPPRESSING LEAKAGE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION AND FOR PROVIDING PERSONALIZED RESPONSE
1y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12743535
Enforcing Compliance with Data Use Policies
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12732487
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR SECURING CONTAINERIZED APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+6.4%)
2y 6m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1279 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