Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/189,389

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SETTING A CONFIGURATION ONTO A NETWORKING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Apr 25, 2025
Priority
Apr 30, 2024 — EU 24305689.2
Examiner
BIAGINI, CHRISTOPHER D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Ovh
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
290 granted / 496 resolved
-1.5% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
507
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
86.6%
+46.6% vs TC avg
§102
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 496 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 15 is directed to “a networking device configured to” perform various functions. However, the claim does not recite any structure for performing the functions, and because the “device” is the entire claim (as opposed to “an element in a claim for a combination”), 35 USC 112(f) does not control interpretation. Consequently, (1) there is no clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter covered by the claim; (2) the language does not set forth well-defined boundaries of the invention and instead only states a problem solved or a result obtained; and (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would know from the claim terms what structure is encompassed by the claim; accordingly, the claim is indefinite under 112(b). See MPEP 2173.05(g). Claims 16-18 are rejected for inheriting the deficiencies of claim 15. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 19 is directed to a “computer-readable medium comprising instructions.” Giving its terms their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim as a whole may be reasonably construed to encompass transitory media such as electromagnetic carrier waves. Transitory media are not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter within the meaning of 35 USC 101. The Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite a “non-transitory computer-readable medium.” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13 and 14 allowed. Claims 15-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. Claims 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not teach or suggest a combination as claimed in each of the independent claims. For example, although the closest prior art document of record (“Zero Touch Provisioning for NETCONF Call Home draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-04”, supplied by Applicant in the IDS filed 4/25/2005) teaches an information exchange with a DHCP server that a device can use to bootstrap configuration information, the document does not teach or suggest the detailed combination of features in claims 13, 15, and 19, including “establishing, by the networking device, a communicable link with a DHCP server in the network; requesting, by the networking device, a network connection information, comprising the location of a file server in the network; receiving, from the DHCP server, the requested network connection information; establishing, by the networking device, using the received network connection information, a communicable link with a HTTP repository in the network; requesting, by the networking device, and receiving from the HTTP repository a firmware upgrade if available, and a software agent; upgrading by the networking device of the firmware upon the firmware upgrade being available; establishing, by the networking device, using the received network connection information, a communicable link with the file server ;requesting, by the networking device, and receiving from the file server, a startup configuration; and setting the startup configuration onto a flash memory of the networking device; andupon a reboot subsequent to the initial boot of the networking device, executing by the networking device the received software agent, comprising: establishing, by the networking device, a communicable link with a configuration automation tool in the network; requesting, by the networking device, a running configuration; receiving, from the configuration automation tool, the running configuration; and setting the running configuration onto a Random Access Memory (RAM) of the networking device”. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher D. Biagini whose telephone number is (571)272-9743. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays from 9 AM - 5 PM. 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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571) 270-1684. 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. Christopher D. Biagini Primary Examiner Art Unit 2445 /Christopher Biagini/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 25, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12645486
INSTANT ACCESS OF A LARGE VIRTUAL MACHINE USING A SECOND VIRTUAL DISK IN A METADATA FILE MANAGER
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12647318
UPDATING ACCESS POINTS OF A COMMUNICATION NETWORK
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12641020
METHOD FOR FACILITATING CONVEYING OF A DATA FRAME IN A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
1y 8m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12634234
CONTAINER NETWORK COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 10m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634200
Systems and methods for Configuration Management Database (CMDB) based application segmentation
2y 0m to grant Granted May 19, 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
58%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+30.1%)
4y 5m (~3y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 496 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