Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 19/196,767

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CLASSIFICATION AND RECLASSIFICATION OF STRUCTURED AND UNSTRUCTURED DATA USING SIMILARITY-BASED SIGNATURES

Final Rejection §112
Filed
May 02, 2025
Priority
May 02, 2024 — provisional 63/641,653
Examiner
HALE, BROOKS T
Art Unit
2166
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Securiti LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 9m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allowance Rate
44 granted / 86 resolved
-3.8% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
122
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
§103
62.1%
+22.1% vs TC avg
§102
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 86 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 Status Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 (and similar claims 19 and 20) recites the following new matter: identify, based on the similarity metrics generated from the embeddings, an inconsistency between the respective classification outputs for the at least one same entity, wherein the inconsistency corresponds to assignment of the at least one same entity to different clusters by the first mode and the second mode; wherein the reclassification resolves the inconsistency between the respective classification outputs for the at least one same entity by modifying clustering associated with the at least one same entity, including reassigning the at least one same entity between clusters. The original disclosure make no reference to “identifying an inconsistency between the respective classification outputs for the at least one same entity”. Claims 2-18 are rejected due to dependence on claims 1. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Brooks Hale whose telephone number is 571-272-0160. The examiner can normally be reached 9am to 5pm est. 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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached on (571) 272-4098. 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. /B.T.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2166 /KHANH B PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 08, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 31, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 04, 2026
Interview Requested
Sep 11, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12737381
DATABASE SYNCHRONIZATION BASED ON MEMORY TRANSFER
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12705217
GENERATING DERIVED DIMENSIONS TO MODIFY DATA COLLECTION SCHEMAS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL DATA INGESTION
5y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12619577
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR FREE SPACE MANAGEMENT
2y 4m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12608387
Mirage Instance of a Database Server
5y 8m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12572584
DATA STORAGE METHOD AND APPARATUS BASED ON BLOCKCHAIN NETWORK
3y 4m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
51%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+34.6%)
3y 1m (~1y 9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 86 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