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 .
1. This is in response to the communications filed on 13 May 2026.
2. Claims 2-20 are pending in the application.
3. Claims 2-20 have been rejected.
4. Claim 1 has been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's election with traverse of group 2, claims 2-20, drawn to proving secure communications and access in the reply filed on 13 May 2026 is acknowledged.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
6. Claims 2-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,231,409 B2 (hereinafter the ‘409 patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the earlier filed claims of the ‘409 patent in that the claims of the ‘409 patent contain all of the limitations of the instant application. Claims 2-20 of the instant application therefore are not patentably distinct from the earlier filed claims of the ‘409 patent, and as such, are unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting.
As to claim 2, the ‘409 patent discloses a method for linking mobile applications to multi-access point providers using intermediary database that is populated based on mobile application metadata in order to provide secure communication of user data encrypted specifically for a given multi-access point provider, the method comprising:
receiving, at an intermediary database, a first communication from a background application implemented on a mobile device, wherein the first communication comprises a first access point address and is generated based on a request, by a first access point, for first user information for use by a first provider, wherein the first provider provides the first access point [column 20, lines 38-44];
determining, at the intermediary database, a first access point identifier for the first access point based on metadata retrieved from the first access point [column 20, lines 45-47];
comparing the first access point identifier to a plurality of subsets of access point identifiers at the intermediary database, wherein each of the plurality of subsets corresponds to a previous provider of a user [column 20, lines 48-51];
determining, based on comparing the first access point identifier to the plurality of subsets, that the first access point identifier corresponds to a first subset of the plurality of subsets, wherein each access point identifier in the first subset corresponds to the first provider [column 20, lines 52-56];
determining first alternative content for the first subset, wherein the first alternative content is a first unique token that is specific to the first provider [column 20, lines 57-59];
in response to determining the first alternative content for the first subset, generating a second communication, wherein the second communication comprises the first alternative content [column 20, lines 60-63]; and
transmitting the second communication to the background application, wherein the background application responds to the request using the first alternative content [column 20, lines 64-67].
As to claim 3, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining, at the intermediary database, the first access point identifier for the first access point comprises:
determining a first unique identifier used to locate the first access point on the Internet [column 21, lines 4-5]; and
generating a first hash value based on the first unique identifier [column 21, lines 6-7].
As to claim 4, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein comparing the first access point identifier to the plurality of subsets of access point identifiers, at the intermediary database, that correspond to the user further comprises:
retrieving a hash value [column 21, line 12]; and
comparing the hash value to existing hash values in the intermediary database for the first user information [column 21, lines 13-14].
As to claim 5, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining the first alternative content for the first subset further comprises:
determining a first provider identifier for the first subset [column 21, line 17]; and
inputting the first provider identifier into the intermediary database to receive the first alternative content [column 21, lines 19-20].
As to claim 6, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining, based on comparing a second access point identifier to the plurality of subsets, that the second access point identifier does not correspond to any subset of the plurality of subsets [column 21, lines 22-25]; and
in response to determining that the second access point identifier does not correspond to any subset of the plurality of subsets, generating second alternative content based on the second access point identifier [column 21, lines 26-29].
As to claim 7, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data from a plurality of predetermined metadata fields in the metadata [column 21, lines 34-35]; and
generating a provider ranking based on the data, wherein the provider ranking corresponds to a likelihood that a given provider corresponds to the first access point [column 21, lines 36-38].
As to claim 8, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data corresponding to a developer email domain name [column 21, lines 43-44]; and
comparing the developer email domain name to a provider name to determine the first access point identifier [column 21, lines 45-46].
As to claim 9, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data corresponding to a number of reviews of the first access point [column 21, lines 51-52]; and
comparing the number of reviews of the first access point to a threshold number to determine the first access point identifier [column 21, lines 53-55].
As to claim 10, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 9, wherein comparing the number of reviews of the first access point to a threshold number to determine the first access point identifier further comprises:
determining that the number of reviews of the first access point exceeds the threshold number [column 21, lines 59-60]; and
in response to determining that the number of reviews of the first access point exceeds the threshold number, retrieving additional data corresponding to a provider of the first access point [column 21, lines 61-64].
As to claim 11, the ‘409 patent discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data corresponding to a last date of a third-party review for the first access point [column 22, lines 5-6];
comparing the last date to a threshold date [column 22, line 7];
determining that the last date is after the threshold date [column 22, line 8]; and
in response to determining that the last date is after the threshold date, retrieving additional data corresponding to a provider of the first access point [column 22, lines 10-12].
As to claim 12, the ‘409 patent discloses a non-transitory, computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause operations comprising:
receiving, at an intermediary database, a first communication from a background application implemented on a mobile device, wherein the first communication comprises a first access point address and is generated based on a request, by a first access point, for first user information for use by a first provider, wherein the first provider provides the first access point [column 22, lines 16-22];
determining, at the intermediary database, a first access point identifier for the first access point based on metadata retrieved from the first access point [column 22, lines 23-25];
comparing the first access point identifier to a plurality of subsets of access point identifiers at the intermediary database, wherein each of the plurality of subsets corresponds to a previous provider of a user [column 22, lines 26-29];
determining, based on comparing the first access point identifier to the plurality of subsets, that the first access point identifier corresponds to a first subset of the plurality of subsets, wherein each access point identifier in the first subset corresponds to the first provider [column 22, lines 30-34];
determining first alternative content for the first subset, wherein the first alternative content is a first unique token that is specific to the first provider [column 22, lines 35-37];
in response to determining the first alternative content for the first subset, generating a second communication, wherein the second communication comprises the first alternative content [column 22, lines 38-41]; and
transmitting the second communication to the background application, wherein the background application responds to the request using the first alternative content [column 22, lines 42-45].
As to claim 13, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining, at the intermediary database, the first access point identifier for the first access point comprises:
determining a first unique identifier used to locate the first access point on the Internet [column 22, lines 50-51]; and
generating a first hash value based on the first unique identifier [column 22, lines 52-53].
As to claim 14, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein comparing the first access point identifier to the plurality of subsets of access point identifiers, at the intermediary database, that correspond to the user further comprises:
retrieving a hash value [column 22, line 59]; and
comparing the hash value to existing hash values in the intermediary database for the first user information [column 22, lines 60-61].
As to claim 15, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining the first alternative content for the first subset further comprises:
determining a first provider identifier for the first subset [column 22, line 65]; and
inputting the first provider identifier into the intermediary database to receive the first alternative content [column 23, lines 1-2].
As to claim 16, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, further comprising:
determining, based on comparing a second access point identifier to the plurality of subsets, that the second access point identifier does not correspond to any subset of the plurality of subsets [column 23, lines 5-8]; and
in response to determining that the second access point identifier does not correspond to any subset of the plurality of subsets, generating second alternative content based on the second access point identifier [column 23, lines 9-12].
As to claim 17, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data from a plurality of predetermined metadata fields in the metadata [column 23, lines 17-18]; and
generating a provider ranking based on the data, wherein the provider ranking corresponds to a likelihood that a given provider corresponds to the first access point [column 23, lines 19-21].
As to claim 18, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data corresponding to a developer email domain name [column 24, lines 1-2]; and
comparing the developer email domain name to a provider name to determine the first access point identifier [column 24, lines 3-4].
As to claim 19, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein determining the first access point identifier for the first access point based on the metadata retrieved from the first access point further comprises:
retrieving data corresponding to a number of reviews of the first access point [column 24, lines 9-10]; and
comparing the number of reviews of the first access point to a threshold number to determine the first access point identifier [column 24, lines 11-13].
As to claim 20, the ‘409 patent discloses the non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein comparing the number of reviews of the first access point to a threshold number to determine the first access point identifier further comprises:
determining that the number of reviews of the first access point exceeds the threshold number [column 24, lines 18-19]; and
in response to determining that the number of reviews of the first access point exceeds the threshold number, retrieving additional data corresponding to a provider of the first access point [column 24, lines 20-23].
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 2-20 are allowed over the prior art.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art to the instant application is Bouchet et al US 2021/0410051 A1 (hereinafter Bouchet). Bouchet is directed to control plane and data plane API’s for generating access points and associated the access points with data containers, as well as for generating access point policies that specify permissions for the access points [abstract]. Bouchet teaches various types of access points with varying metadata [0015]. Bouchet teaches multiple access points for data container storage that may evaluate the access point policy when an authorized entity makes a request directed to the access point. Bouchet teaches permissions in the access point policies determine whether the request is granted or denied [0022]. However, the prior art does not disclose, teach or fairly suggest the limitations of “comparing the first access point identifier to a plurality of subsets of access point identifiers at the intermediary database, wherein each of the plurality of subsets corresponds to a previous provider of a user”, “determining, based on comparing the first access point identifier to the plurality of subsets, that the first access point identifier corresponds to a first subset of the plurality of subsets, wherein each access point identifier in the first subset corresponds to the first provider”, “determining first alternative content for the first subset, wherein the first alternative content is a first unique token that is specific to the first provider”, “in response to determining the first alternative content for the first subset, generating a second communication, wherein the second communication comprises the first alternative content” and “transmitting the second communication to the background application, wherein the background application responds to the request using the first alternative content”, as recited in independent claims 2 and 12.
Any claims not directly addressed are allowed on the virtue of their dependency.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Relevant Prior Art
8. The following references have been considered relevant by the examiner:
A. Olson et al US 2022/0138158 A1 directed to fault tolerance in delivery of event information within a file system cluster [abstract].
B. Verheyen US 2022/01500220 A1 directed to a secure data exchange system that permits device to exchange secure message keys and securely transmit messages between devices [abstract].
C. Krstic et al US 2015/0347748 A1 directed to techniques for handling security of an application and its extension [abstract].
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARAVIND K MOORTHY whose telephone number is (571)272-3793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 4:30-3:00.
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, Catherine Thiaw can be reached at 571-270-1138. 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.
/ARAVIND K MOORTHY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2407
Prosecution Insights