Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/212,936

Browser extensionless phish-proof multi-factor authentication (MFA)

Non-Final OA §112§DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
May 20, 2025
Priority
Nov 17, 2021 — continuation of 11/962,580 +1 more
Examiner
MURPHY, JOSEPH B
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Akamai Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
583 granted / 646 resolved
+32.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
668
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 646 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to an application filed on May 20, 2025, in which claims 1 through 7 are pending, and ready for examination. Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for domestic benefit as a Continuation of U.S. Application No. 18/636,468 filed on April 16, 2024, now U.S. Patent No. 12,309,141, that application claiming domestic benefit as a Continuation of U.S. Application No. 17/528,504 filed on November 17, 2021, now U.S. Patent No. 11,962,580. 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 Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites, “and note the fished site”. It appears that the claim should recite, “and not the fished site”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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. Claims 1-7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,962,580. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other for the following reason(s): Claim 1 of the instant application is merely a broader recitation of that which is recited in the independent claim(s) of U.S. Patent No. 11,962,580. As for the dependent claims of the instant application, said claims recite various subject matter recited in the various dependent claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,962,580. 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 1-7 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites, “the browser”, and, “the phished site”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these elements in the claim(s). Claims 2-7 are each dependent upon claim 1, and are therefore rejected under the same rationale. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Momchilov, et al., U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0020656 Hinton, et al., U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0259753 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. Brant Murphy whose telephone number is (571)272-6433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am - 4pm. 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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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. /J. BRANT MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435 August 22, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 20, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112, §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12756443
INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 6m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12743551
DATA AGGREGATION DEVICE
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12724915
SEMANTIC SEARCH AND RETRIEVAL OVER ENCRYPTED VECTOR SPACE
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12726461
EFFICIENT PACKET TRANSMISSION METHOD USING EBPF (XDP) AND COMPUTING DEVICE FOR THE SAME
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12719904
DETECTING AND CLASSIFYING SECURITY INTRUSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTAINER ENVIRONMENTS
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 0m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 646 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