Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 22, 2026
Application No. 19/200,580

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR UTILIZATION OF FIREWALL POLICIES FOR NETWORK SECURITY

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
May 06, 2025
Priority
Nov 24, 2021 — provisional 63/283,038 +2 more
Examiner
SALL, EL HADJI MALICK
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Level 3 Communications LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allowance Rate
847 granted / 929 resolved
+33.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -8% lift
Without
With
+-8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
947
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.8%
-29.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 929 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . This action is in response to the application filed on May 6, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 represent SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR UTILIZATION OF FIREWALL POLICIES FOR NETWORK SECURITY. Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). 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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this 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/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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. 19/200,580 12,401,621 12,095,735 1. A method comprising: encoding a firewall ruleset into a plurality of arrays each comprising a string of bits, wherein each bit of the plurality of arrays corresponds to one processing rule of the firewall ruleset, the encoding comprising utilizing at least one target address based on a determine mapping value; combining the plurality of arrays into a new array comprising a string of bits; obtaining, utilizing a first portion of a network address included in a received communication packet, the new array from a data structure; determining a bit value from the new array based on a second portion of the network address; and processing the received communication packet based on the bit value from the new array. 1. A method for providing a firewall service, the method comprising: encoding a firewall ruleset into a plurality of arrays each comprising a string of bits, wherein each bit of the plurality of arrays corresponds to one processing rule of the firewall ruleset; combining the plurality of arrays into a new array comprising a string of bits; obtaining, utilizing a first portion of a network address included in a received communication packet, the new array from a data structure; determining a bit value from the new array based on a second portion of the network address; and processing the received communication packet based on the bit value from the new array. 1. A method for providing a firewall service, the method comprising: encoding a firewall ruleset into one or more arrays comprising a string of bits, wherein each bit of the one or more arrays corresponds to one processing rule of the firewall ruleset; obtaining, utilizing a first portion of a network address included in a received communication packet, the one or more arrays from a data structure; determining a bit value from the one or more arrays based on a second portion of the network address; and processing the received communication packet based on the bit value from the one or more arrays. 2. Claims 1-20 of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No(s). 12,401,621 and 12,095,735, issued to Whelton. Although the conflicting set of claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because a comparison between the two set of claims shows that the instant claims 1-20 are anticipated by claims 1-20 of ‘621 and ‘735. Conclusion 3. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EL HADJI SALL whose telephone number is (571)272-4010. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-8:30 (flexible). 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, Ario Etienne can be reached on 5712724001. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /EL HADJI M SALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 06, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12771625
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF NETWORK OPERATION METRICS AND GENERATION OF NETWORK OPERATION METRICS VISUALIZATIONS
1y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12764096
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND DEVICES FOR SOFTWARE DEFINED NETWORK MONITORING
2y 0m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12764036
NETWORK RESOURCE MODELS AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR ACTIONS EXECUTED ACCORDING TO MACHINE LEARNING INFERENCE REPORTS
1y 11m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12750422
ALLOCATION OF SERVER RESOURCES IN REMOTE-ACCESS COMPUTING ENVIRONMENTS
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12748878
ENCRYPTED INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 29, 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
91%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (-8.3%)
2y 7m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 929 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