Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/990,140

AUTOMATED ROBOCALL DETECTION

Non-Final OA §101§DP
Filed
Dec 20, 2024
Priority
Jan 04, 2022 — provisional 63/296,355 +2 more
Examiner
MATAR, AHMAD
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
CenturyLink Intellectual Property LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
Est. Remaining
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allowance Rate
10 granted / 18 resolved
-4.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
20
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
79.1%
+39.1% vs TC avg
§102
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§112
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 18 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §DP
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/23/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Statutory Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 1 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1- 19 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12177382. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. The claims are identical. Non-statutory 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 – 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11962718. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are drawn to the same invention with some minor wording changes among the claims, and some shifting of limitations. For example, claim 1 of the current application is simply broader than claim 1 of the ‘718. A broad claim is an obvious variation of the narrow claim. It is noted that applicant has filed a Terminal Disclaimer to avoid a double patenting rejection of the claims in child application 18634505 (Patent number U.S. Patent #12177382) which has identical claims to the current application. That is, the current claims (and the claims in application 18634505 - Patent number U.S. Patent #12177382) are not patentably distinct from the claims in US patent number 11962718. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190174000 A1 (Bharrat) discloses methods, systems and apparatus for identifying and acting upon suspect robocalls. It teaches processing call records of a customer to identify calls which are possibly from a robocaller, based on at least one of i) a call characteristic or ii) a call pattern; storing calling party source identification information of the identified calls in a suspect robocall database; and handling the call as a suspect robocall if the incoming calling party source identification information is in the suspect robocall database. US 20180013881 A1 (Cooper) teaches [0010] a telecommunications system for determining and blocking undesired inbound calls. The system comprises a spam detection unit that evaluates the audio from the incoming call and determines whether the incoming call is spam. US-9571640-B1 (Chen) discloses [abstract] a computer-implemented method for detecting calls from illegitimate calling parties may include (1) collecting information about a plurality of calls received at a plurality of telephonic devices, (2) analyzing the information about the plurality of calls to identify at least one call pattern of illegitimate calling parties, (3) detecting, at a telephonic device, an incoming call, (4) determining whether one or more calls from the calling party of the incoming call fit the call pattern of illegitimate calling parties, and (5) disposing of the incoming call based at least in part on determining whether the one or more calls from the calling party of the incoming call fit the call pattern of illegitimate calling parties. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMAD F. MATAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7488. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 - 5:30. 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. 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. /AHMAD F. MATAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12671763
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AN IDENTICAL RESPONSE TO A SIMILAR ISSUE THAT IS RECEIVED FROM DIFFERENT CUSTOMERS, VIA INBOUND-INTERACTION IN A DIGITAL MULTI-CHANNEL CONTACT CENTER
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12671764
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RE-SKILLING AGENTS SKILLS IN AN AUTOMATIC CALL DISTRIBUTOR (ACD) APPLICATION DUE TO A REQUEST OF CHANGE TO A SCHEDULED-SHIFT OF AN AGENT
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12574458
METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING CALL AUDIO DATA AND APPARATUS
2y 6m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563143
Pre-Authentication for Interactive Voice Response System
2y 4m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12549669
System and method to evaluate microservices integrated in Interactive Voice Response (IVR) operations
2y 2m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
56%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+13.9%)
3y 11m (~2y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 18 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