Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/013,722

CREATION AND ARRANGEMENT OF ITEMS IN AN ONLINE CONCIERGE SYSTEM-SPECIFIC PORTION OF A WAREHOUSE FOR ORDER FULFILLMENT

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jan 08, 2025
Priority
Apr 21, 2022 — continuation of 11/868,961 +1 more
Examiner
CRAWLEY, TALIA F
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Maplebear Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
Est. Remaining
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allowance Rate
403 granted / 838 resolved
-11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
900
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§103
63.7%
+23.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 838 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Drawings The drawings as submitted on 01/08/2025 by Applicant 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 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); 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 nonstatutory 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. 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of United States Patent No. 11,868,961. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both applications are directed to the system and method for creation and arrangement of items in an online concierge system-specific portion of a warehouse for order fulfillment. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The examiner has considered all references listed on the Notice of References Cited, PTO-892. The examiner has considered all references cited on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted by Applicant, PTO-1449. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TALIA F CRAWLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5397. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Thursday; 8:30 AM-4:30 PM EST. 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, Fahd A Obeid can be reached on 571-270-3324. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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. /TALIA F CRAWLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3687
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12646052
LOCALIZED CURRENCY EXCHANGE AND PAYMENT
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12645568
IDENTIFYING ACTIVE CODE SECTIONS VIA MEMORY FORENSICS
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12639693
DATA INTERACTION METHOD AND DEVICE, AND OFFLINE CREDIT PAYMENT METHOD AND DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12632823
ORDER FULFILLMENT STATION OPERATION TIMER AND INDICATOR
3y 9m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12619945
FLEXIBLE ASSIGNMENT OF MEDIA ADVERTISING ORDERS TO BROADCAST INVENTORY
4y 5m to grant Granted May 05, 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
48%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (+25.3%)
3y 7m (~2y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 838 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