Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 19/202,548

System and Method for Improving Internet Communication by Using Intermediate Nodes

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
May 08, 2025
Priority
Aug 28, 2013 — provisional 61/870,815 +9 more
Examiner
YE, ZI
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Bright Data Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
413 granted / 485 resolved
+25.2% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
503
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 485 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . 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 1-44 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-43 of U.S. Patent No. 12,483,635. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-43 of U.S. Patent No. 12,483,635 alone or in combination teach each and every limitation of claims 1-44 of the instant application. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-44 would be allowable if applicant overcomes the double patenting rejection(s). The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art in the field, such as Wyatt (US 20140244778 A1) teaches the local network appliance receives requests for content from a client or a consumer device. The content request is forwarded to the server (e.g. web server) which hosts the original URL that comprises the content of the request. The content is retrieved from the original server and sent to the user via the local network appliance. Lortz (US 20120254960 A1) teaches Internet-connected vehicle system including processor(s), memory, operating system, application, wireless interface for exchanging data with other devices and internet. Turgeman (US 10069852 B2) teaches the end-user device may be or may comprise, or may be comprised in, a vehicle, a vehicular device. The end user device may access web-site or web-page via one or more local components (e.g., a local native application; a local mobile-web application; a local web-browser). However, prior art of record fail to explicitly teach each and every limitation of the vehicular device for use with a first content identified by a first identifier and stored in a first server, and for use with a second content identified by a second identifier and stored in a second server, in the specific manner and combinations recited in independent claim 1. The prior art of record fail to explicitly teach each and every limitation of the vehicular device for use with a first content identified by a first identifier and stored in a first server, and for use with a second content identified by a second identifier and stored in the first server, in the specific manner and combinations recited in independent claim 23. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZI YE whose telephone number is (571)270-1039. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm. 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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 5712723865. 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. /ZI YE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 08, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12739199
EFFICIENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR ROLE-BASED TRAFFIC SEGMENTATION IN AN OVERLAY NETWORK
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12732564
CROSS-MOBILE NETWORK OPERATOR SERVER
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12732421
SYSTEM AND APPLICATION FOR DYNAMIC CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12683811
ENCRYPTED PHYSICALLY UNCLONABLE FUNCTION CIRCUIT HELPER DATA
4y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12671627
COMPUTING POWER NETWORK NODE EVALUATION AND OPERATION METHOD AND APPARATUS
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.8%)
2y 3m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 485 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