Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/245,172

AI-Driven Digital Asset Co-pilot Apparatuses, Mechanisms, Mediums, Processes and Systems

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 20, 2025
Priority
Oct 12, 2022 — provisional 63/415,602 +3 more
Examiner
POINVIL, FRANTZY
Art Unit
3691
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Wrap Drive Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
757 granted / 956 resolved
+27.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1005
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
42.3%
+2.3% vs TC avg
§103
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§102
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§112
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 956 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-18 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. As per claim 1: On line 1, “AI” should be changed to - -Artificial intelligence (AI) - - On line 10, It is unclear of what is meant by “a set of relevant data providers”. Also on line 10 “the task instructions” lacks clear antecedent basis. As per claim 8, line 3, the acronym “URI” should correctly be spelled out. As per claim 11, line 3, the acronym “URI” should correctly be spelled out. As per claim 12, lines 2-3, the phrase “”user’s digital asset portfolio data” lacks clear antecedent basis. As per claim 16: On line 1, “AI” should be changed to - -Artificial intelligence (AI) - - On line 6, it is unclear of what is meant by “a set of relevant data providers”. Also on line 6 “the task instructions” lacks clear antecedent basis. As per claim 17: On line 1, “AI” should be changed to - -Artificial intelligence (AI) - - On line 8, It is unclear of what is meant by “a set of relevant data providers”. Claims not specifically addressed are rejected based on their dependencies. The prior art taken alone or in combination failed to teach or suggest: “obtain via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, for each respective relevant data provider in the set of relevant data providers, relevant on-demand data from the respective data provider via the function corresponding to the respective relevant data provider, verify that a subtask execution generative AI engine for the task is authorized to use entity data associated with an entity or a user specified via the AI data determining request datastructure, obtain via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, relevant entity data accessible by the user, and composite via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, execution context data for the task from the retrieved relevant historical data, the obtained relevant on-demand data, and the obtained relevant entity data” as recited”, as recited in independent claim 1. “obtain via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, for each respective relevant data provider in the set of relevant data providers, relevant on-demand data from the respective data provider via the function corresponding to the respective relevant data provider, verify that a subtask execution generative AI engine for the task is authorized to use entity data associated with an entity or a user specified via the AI data determining request datastructure, obtain via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, relevant entity data accessible by the user, and composite via the orchestration artificial intelligence engine, execution context data for the task from the retrieved relevant historical data, the obtained relevant on-demand data, and the obtained relevant entity data”, as recited in independent claims 16 and 17. The above recited limitations provide meaningful limitations that transforms the abstract idea into patent eligible. The claim as a whole effects an improvement to another technology or technical field. These limitations in combination provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a practical application. Bathwal et al (US Pub. No. 20240281446 A1) disclose an advanced search system which leverages a pre-trained large language model to enhance user query responses. The system, equipped with hardware processors, a search query via an interface and accesses a pre-trained large language model designed to respond to the search query. The system fine-tunes the model to generate a task-specific generative model. The system employs the task-specific generative model to generate a search result to the search query and analyzes the search result based on a performance metric associated with the task-specific generative model. The system refines the task-specific generative model based on the analyzing of the search result. McCoy (US Pub. No. 20250217772 A1) discloses a system includes a memory and one or more processors coupled to the memory, the one or more processors are configured to: generate, by a first artificial intelligence model receiving as an input a first object including a first textual description of an entity, one or more first metrics descriptive of the entity; generate, by a second artificial intelligence model receiving as an input one or more of the first metrics, a second object including a second textual description of the entity and a first metric; identify, by the first artificial intelligence model, one or more third objects each having at least one first property satisfying a first metric; and cause a presentation of a portion of the second object at a first portion and a portion of the third object at a second portion of a user interface. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZY POINVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6797. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM to 5:30PM. 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, Michael Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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. /fp/ /FRANTZY POINVIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693 June 8, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12646069
Universal Self-Service Kiosk Fraud Detection Platform
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12620033
COMPUTER SOFTWARE, COMPUTER SYSTEM, COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR PREPARING AN ELECTRONIC DATA PACKAGE AND AN ELECTRONIC DATA PACKAGE PREPARED BY SAME
3y 0m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12548000
SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETPLACE
2y 0m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12536543
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SUSPENDING ACCESS TO ACCOUNTS DUE TO INCAPACITY OF USER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12530663
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PAYMENT PLATFORM SELF-CERTIFICATION FOR PROCESSING FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH PAYMENT NETWORKS
2y 10m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
79%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+15.8%)
2y 11m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 956 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