Event-Triggered Reauthentication of At-Risk and Compromised Systems and Accounts

Application No. 19/185,166

• Filed: Apr 21, 2025
• Priority: Oct 28, 2015 — CIP of 14/925,974
  • Dec 31, 2015 — CIP of 10/210,255
  • Apr 05, 2016 — CIP of 10/204,147
  • Apr 28, 2016 — CIP of 10/860,962
  • May 26, 2016 — CIP of 15/166,158
  • Jun 18, 2016 — CIP of 15/186,453
  • Jul 08, 2016 — CIP of 15/206,195
  • Aug 15, 2016 — CIP of 10/248,910
  • Jun 07, 2017 — CIP of 15/616,427
  • Oct 19, 2017 — provisional 62/574,708
  • Oct 23, 2017 — continuation of 10/742,647
  • Apr 23, 2020 — CIP of 11/218,474
  • Dec 31, 2021 — continuation of 12/284,177
• Examiner: ULLAH, SHARIF E
• Assignee: Qomplx LLC
• OA Round: 1 (Non-Final)

Office Action

DETAILED ACTION

Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/21/2025 has been placed in record and considered by the examiner.

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 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12284177. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed limitations are similar in scope, and because claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12284177 contains every element of claims 1-16 of the instant application and thus anticipate the claims of the instant application.

Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 would be allowable if the applicant overcame the rejection(s) under Double Patenting .
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner contacted and left a voicemail to the applicant to discuss a Terminal Disclaimer. The applicant did not return the Examiner's call within the required time period.

Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARIF E. ULLAH whose telephone number is [phone]. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on 5712723739. 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). 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.

/SHARIF E ULLAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495

Prosecution Timeline

• Apr 21, 2025: Application Filed
• Jun 17, 2026: Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)