Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 19/029,308

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR POPULATING ONLINE APPLICATIONS USING THIRD PARTY PLATFORMS

Final Rejection §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Priority
Jan 29, 2014 — provisional 61/933,136 +7 more
Examiner
MURPHY, JOSEPH B
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Capital One Services LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
583 granted / 646 resolved
+32.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
668
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 646 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . 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 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 2-21 are rejected on the grounds of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,052,561. Although the claim at issue is not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reasons: Independent claims 2, 11, and 17 of the instant application are obvious variations of the limitation recited in independent claims 1, 8, and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,052,561, claims 1, 7, and 14 of the instant application reciting components of the claimed system in lieu of “a mobile application running on a first device”, reciting “third-party system” in lieu of “API”, and removing the term “unpopulated” from “unpopulated field(s)”, as examples. Claims 3-10, 12-16, and 18-21 of the instant application further recite various limitations that are also recited throughout the various dependent claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,052,561, and are therefore rejected under the same rationale. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: See PTO-892. Eigner, et al., U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0122988 Vernal, et al., U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0052036 Sharma, et al., U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0109348 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 J. Brant Murphy whose telephone number is (571)272-6433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am - 4pm. 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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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. /J. BRANT MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435 September 30, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT
Aug 07, 2026
Interview Requested
Aug 19, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 20, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 27, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12756443
INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 6m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12743551
DATA AGGREGATION DEVICE
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12724915
SEMANTIC SEARCH AND RETRIEVAL OVER ENCRYPTED VECTOR SPACE
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12726461
EFFICIENT PACKET TRANSMISSION METHOD USING EBPF (XDP) AND COMPUTING DEVICE FOR THE SAME
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12719904
DETECTING AND CLASSIFYING SECURITY INTRUSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTAINER ENVIRONMENTS
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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
99%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 0m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 646 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