Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 19/086,244

TOKENIZING AUTHENTICATION INFORMATION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Mar 21, 2025
Priority
Jun 09, 2021 — continuation of 12/261,837
Examiner
POLTORAK, PIOTR
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Capital One Services LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
455 granted / 608 resolved
+14.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
626
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
52.4%
+12.4% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 608 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 Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority based on U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/343,340 (now USPN 12,261,831), filed Jun. 9, 2021 Information Disclosure Statement The examiner reviewed IDS document(s) on 3/21/25, carefully considering the art cited within the document(s). Claims 1-20 have been examined. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-20 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20of U.S. Patent No. 12,261,837. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they either recite a concomitance of the claim features, or they are their obvious modifications. Specifically, the instant claims are much broader version of the patented claims. Compare the independent claims, for example. Conclusion 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter Poltorak whose telephone number is (571) 272-3840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached on (571) 272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /PIOTR POLTORAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Sep 17, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12719860
Online Authentication Systems and Methods
3y 0m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12712877
BIOMETRIC INTERACTION MANAGER
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12695618
Message Push Method, Electronic Device, and Storage Medium
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12694735
MOBILE DEVICE REQUIRING IDENTITY-RELATED INFORMATION TO UNLOCK A LOCK IN ONE OF TWO MODES FOR UNLOCKING THE LOCK
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12676853
USER IDENTIFICATION WITH INPUT PROFILE RECORD
4y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 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
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.4%)
3y 5m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 608 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