Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/261,272

ADHOC ENROLLMENT PROCESS

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Jul 07, 2025
Examiner
SARMA, ABHISHEK
Art Unit
2621
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Aware Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
478 granted / 572 resolved
+21.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+1.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
590
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
§103
73.0%
+33.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
§112
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 572 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. In the response to this Office Action, the Examiner respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the Examiner in prosecuting this application. 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). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 1 is under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,531,742 B2. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. The following is an example for comparing claim 1 of this application and claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,531,742 B2: Claim 1 of this application Claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,531,742 B2 1. A method comprising: registering a user biometric, comprising: capturing a first biometric modality associated with a user at a first time; extracting first biometric data from the biometric modality; and generating a first template based on the first biometric data; and enrolling the user in a system, comprising: capturing the first biometric modality associated with the user at a second time after the first time; extracting second biometric data from the first biometric modality; generating a second template based on the second biometric data; comparing the second template with the first template to quantify a degree of similarity therebetween; and sending, when the quantified degree of similarity between the first template and a second template exceed a threshold, a confirmation. 1. A method comprising: registering a user biometric, comprising: capturing a first biometric modality associated with a user at a first time; extracting first biometric data from the biometric modality; and generating a first template based on the first biometric data; and enrolling the user in a system, comprising: capturing the first biometric modality associated with the user at a second time after the first time; extracting second biometric data from the first biometric modality; generating a second template based on the second biometric data; comparing the second template with the first template to quantify a degree of similarity therebetween; and sending, when the quantified degree of similarity between the first template and a second template exceed a threshold, a confirmation. 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. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,727,099 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. The following is an example for comparing claim 1 of this application and claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,727,099 B2: Claim 1 of this application Claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,727,099 B2 1. A method comprising: registering a user biometric, comprising: capturing a first biometric modality associated with a user at a first time; extracting first biometric data from the biometric modality; and generating a first template based on the first biometric data; and enrolling the user in a system, comprising: capturing the first biometric modality associated with the user at a second time after the first time; extracting second biometric data from the first biometric modality; generating a second template based on the second biometric data; comparing the second template with the first template to quantify a degree of similarity therebetween; and sending, when the quantified degree of similarity between the first template and a second template exceed a threshold, a confirmation. 1. A method comprising: registering a user biometric, comprising: receiving first biometric information associated with a user at a first time; extracting first biometric data from the first biometric information; and generating a first template based on the first biometric data; and enrolling the user in a system, comprising: receiving the first biometric information associated with the user at a second time after the first time; extracting second biometric data from the first biometric information; generating a second template based on the second biometric data; comparing the second template with the first template to generate a confidence value reflecting a degree of similarity between the first template and the second template; and sending, based on comparing the confidence value to a threshold value, at least one of a confirmation and an alert. The limitations of claim 1 of current application are broader and are therefore anticipated by those found in claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,727,099 B2. Claim 1 is similarly rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent 12,019,728 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 1 is similarly rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent 12,386,937 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0104485 A1 to Miller et al. (hereinafter "Miller"). Regarding Claim 1, Miller teaches a method comprising: registering a user biometric, comprising: capturing a first biometric modality associated with a user at a first time; extracting first biometric data from the biometric modality; and generating a first template based on the first biometric data (Figs. 1-9; Para. 29-49 of Miller; Biometric client 13 is implemented a computer having a suitable operating system and various application programs. Biometric client 13 includes commercially available biometric input and capture devices, such as a digital camera 41 for capturing facial images, a fingerprint scanner 43 and an iris image capture device 45… biometric image may be a digital photograph of a face, a fingerprint scan, an iris scan, a wave file of a voice, or any other biometric image. The biometric matching engine creates a biometric template from the biometric image at block 62); and enrolling the user in a system, comprising: capturing the first biometric modality associated with the user at a second time after the first time; extracting second biometric data from the first biometric modality; generating a second template based on the second biometric data (Figs. 1-9; Para. 29-49 of Miller; biometric matching engine caches templates as part of a record. The record contains a record ID, which specifies an individual, and all biometric templates for that individual. For example, a record could contain face, fingerprint and iris templates for the individual associated with the record ID); comparing the second template with the first template to quantify a degree of similarity therebetween; and sending, when the quantified degree of similarity between the first template and a second template exceed a threshold, a confirmation (Figs. 7-14; Para. 46-59 of Miller; system orders the probe templates according to the search table, at block 123. For example, if the biometrics are iris, face, and left thumb, the system would perform the search on the left thumb first, then the face, and then the iris, as indicated in FIG. 10. The system then lets N equal the number of probe templates and lets index i equal one as indicated at block 125. Then, the system tests, at decision block 127 if i is equal to N. If not, the system compares probe template i with the first or next template in the match set, as indicated at block 129. Then, the system determines, at decision block 131 if the score returned from the comparison is less than the pruning threshold. If so, the system removes the record from the match set, at block 133. If, on the other hand, the score is greater than the pruning threshold, then the record ID is left in the match set. The system then determines, at decision block 135, if there are more templates in the match set. If so, the process returns to block 129 to compare template i with the next template in the match set. Processing continues to loop through blocks 129 to 133 until there are no more templates in the match set, as determined at decision block 135… After collecting all the scores in either the match or the non-match category, the system performs statistical analysis of the match category, as indicated at block 191, and statistical analysis of the non-match category, as indicated at block 193). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABHISHEK SARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-9887. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amr Awad can be reached on 571-272-7764. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. /ABHISHEK SARMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 07, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602122
INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM TOUCH DETECTION DEVICE GROUNDING AND SELF-TEST
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597288
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586256
DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586519
DISPLAY APPARATUS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579398
FINGERPRINT SENSOR PACKAGE AND SMART CARD INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+1.6%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 572 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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