Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/999,040

Location-Based Parental Controls

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Dec 23, 2024
Priority
Nov 07, 2019 — continuation of 11/303,648 +2 more
Examiner
MEKY, MOUSTAFA M
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Comcast Cable Communications LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allowance Rate
682 granted / 730 resolved
+33.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
733
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§102
37.4%
-2.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 730 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Detailed Action Claims 1-20 are presenting for examination. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-7 & 15-20 are allowed. Claims 1 & 15 are allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest a computing device and a method including the limitations of “determining, based on first communications between a first wireless computing device and one or more wireless access points, a first location of the first wireless computing device; determining, based on second communications between a second wireless computing device and the one or more wireless access points, a second location of the second wireless computing device; preventing, based on a request for first content and based on determining that the first location corresponds to a different room compared to the second location, access, by the first wireless computing device, to the first content; and providing, based on the request and based on the determining that the first location corresponds to a different room compared to the second location, access, by the first wireless computing device, to second content associated with the first content” Claims 2-7 & 16-20 are allowed because of their dependency from claims 1 & 15. non-statutory double patenting rejection 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 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 non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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. Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,218,951. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the patent 12,218,951 anticipated claim 8 of the examined application as been shown in the table below. 18/999,040 12,218,951 (New) A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to: determine, based on first communications between a first wireless computing device and one or more wireless access points, a first location of the first wireless computing device; determine, based on second communications between a second wireless computing device and the one or more wireless access points, a second location of the second wireless computing device; and provide, based on a request for first content and based on determining that the first location and the second location correspond to a same room, access, by the first wireless computing device, to the first content. 1. A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to: determine, based on first communications between a first wireless computing device and one or more wireless access points, a first location, of the first wireless computing device, within a premises; determine, based on second communications between a second wireless computing device and the one or more wireless access points, a second location, of the second wireless computing device, within the premises; retrieve, based on a request for first content, based on determining that the first location corresponds to a different room in the premises than the second location, and based on a first access level of a plurality of access levels, second content, wherein the second content comprises a modified version of the first content based on parental controls; and cause the second content to be sent to the first wireless computing device, wherein a second access level of the plurality of access levels is configured to provide, to the first wireless computing device, access to the first content when the first wireless computing device and the second wireless computing device are in a same room. Claims 9-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record doesn’t teach the limitations of claims 9-14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moustafa M Meky whose telephone number is (571)272-4005. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. 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. MOUSTAFA M. MEKY Primary Patent Examiner Art Unit 2457 /MOUSTAFA M MEKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457 06/26/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12676904
CONFERENCE OPERATOR
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12665873
NAT ROUTE DISTRIBUTION BASED ON TAG INFORMATION IN AN SDWAN OVERLAY NETWORK
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12659239
CONFIGURATION OF COMPUTING DEVICES BASED ON GEOGRAPHIC PATTERN DETECTION
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12652329
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MERGING DATA FRAMES FOR VEHICLE NETWORK SYSTEM, AND STORAGE MEDIUM STORING INSTRUCTIONS TO PERFORM METHOD FOR MERGING DATA FRAMES
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12652249
Egress and private router detection in Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPV6)
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
93%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+5.2%)
2y 3m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 730 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