Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/039,485

RADIO BASE STATION, USER TERMINAL AND RADIO COMMUNICATION METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 19, 2018
Examiner
YANG, ZHAOHUI
Art Unit
2468
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
NTT Docomo Inc.
OA Round
12 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
13-14
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
281 granted / 391 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
435
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
66.5%
+26.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 391 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2-5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He; Hong et al. US 20140293842 A1, in view of Yin; Zhanping et al. US PGPUB 20140269539 A1. Regarding claim 2. He teaches A terminal comprising: a receiver that receives (Fig. 1, UE Receiver 144) a configuration indicating a plurality of timings for uplink, ([0026] the TDD UL/DL configuration indicated in a system information block (SIB) message. In some embodiments the SIB message indicating of DL subframe or a set of DL subframes conveying the DCI may be the system information block type 1 (SIB1) as described in the 3GPP LTE standards. The SIB1 may be broadcast by the eNB 104, and correspondingly received by the UE 108, on the PDSCH. ) receives a first downlink control information including a first timing information indicating a transmission timing of a HARQ-ACK feedback within a radio frame relative to a reception timing of a physical downlink shared channel within a radio frame, ([0031] the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n, while the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n+1 may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n+1.) and receives a second downlink control information including a second timing information indicating a transmission timing of the HARQ-ACK feedback within a radio frame relative to a reception timing of the physical downlink shared channel within a radio frame; ([0031] the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n, while the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n+1 may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n+1.) and performs transmission of the HARQ-ACK feedback at the selected timing, ([0026] In some embodiments, the transmission of data, either from the eNB 104 or the UE 108, and/or the transmission of a HARQ-ACK signal may be performed according to the timing prescribed by one or more of the TDD UL/DL configurations depicted above in Table 1.) wherein the second timing information is different from the first timing information. ([0044] Otherwise, in a third case, the HARQ-ACK timing for DL type 2 subframes in radio frame n may follow a TDD UL/DL configuration that is different from the TDD UL/DL configuration of radio frames n or n+1 if the DL subframes of the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n is neither a subset nor a superset of the DL subframes of the TDD UL/DL configuration of radio frame n+1.) He does not teach a processor that determines whether the first timing information indicates a subframe within a specific range corresponding to one or more subframes assigned to uplink, and determines whether the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, wherein, when it is determined that the first timing information does not indicates a subframe within the specific range and that the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, the processor does not select, from among the plurality of timings, a timing based on the first timing information, selects, from among the plurality of timings, the timing based on the second timing information, However, Yin teaches a processor that determines whether the first timing information indicates a subframe within a specific range corresponding to one or more subframes assigned to uplink, ([0043] For example, the PDSCH HARQ-ACK configuration may follow a first reference UL/DL configuration with a number (e.g., minimum number) of UL subframes in the allowed UL/DL reconfiguration range. The first reference UL/DL configuration may or may not be the same as a default UL/DL configuration.) and determines whether the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, ([0044] The PUSCH scheduling and PUSCH HARQ-ACK timing of a dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration cell may follow a second reference UL/DL configuration with a number (e.g., maximum number) of UL subframes in the allowed UL/DL reconfiguration range.) wherein, when it is determined that the first timing information does not indicates a subframe within the specific range and that the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, the processor does not select, from among the plurality of timings, a timing based on the first timing information, ([0076] If the UL/DL configurations have different periodicity, the first reference UL/DL configuration is a configuration defined by the fixed UL allocations among all configured configurations, and the second reference UL/DL configuration is defined by the fixed DL or special subframe allocations among all configured UL/DL configurations.) selects, from among the plurality of timings, the timing based on the second timing information, ([0076] The first reference UL/DL configuration (e.g., the DL-reference UL/DL configuration) and the second reference UL/DL configuration (e.g., the UL-reference UL/DL configuration) may be selected from the seven existing TDD UL/DL configurations.) in order to increase system efficiency by reducing reconfigurations by supporting dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration ([0046]) He and Yin are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in He with the technique of dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration in order to increase system efficiency. Regarding claim 3. He and Yin teaches A radio communication method for a terminal comprising the identical steps performed by the UE in claim 2. It is rejected for the same reasons. Regarding claim 4. He teaches A base station comprising: a transmitter (Fig. 1, eNB 104, Transmitter circuitry 124) that transmits a configuration indicating a plurality of timings for uplink; ([0026] the TDD UL/DL configuration indicated in a system information block (SIB) message. In some embodiments the SIB message indicating of DL subframe or a set of DL subframes conveying the DCI may be the system information block type 1 (SIB1) as described in the 3GPP LTE standards. The SIB1 may be broadcast by the eNB 104, and correspondingly received by the UE 108, on the PDSCH. ) and a processor (Fig. 1 Processor 128) that determines a first timing information indicating a transmission timing of a HARQ-ACK feedback within a radio frame relative to a reception timing of a physical downlink shared channel within a radio frame, ([0031] the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n, while the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n+1 may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n+1.) determines that a second timing information indicating a transmission timing of the HARQ-ACK feedback within a radio frame relative to a reception timing of a physical downlink shared channel withina radio frame, ([0031] the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n, while the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n+1 may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n+1.) controls transmitting a first downlink control information including the first timing information, and controls transmitting a second downlink control information including the second timing information,([0031] the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n, while the DCI message that indicates the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n+1 may be transmitted in a subframe of radio frame n+1.) wherein the second timing information is different from the first timing information. . ([0044] Otherwise, in a third case, the HARQ-ACK timing for DL type 2 subframes in radio frame n may follow a TDD UL/DL configuration that is different from the TDD UL/DL configuration of radio frames n or n+1 if the DL subframes of the TDD UL/DL configuration for radio frame n is neither a subset nor a superset of the DL subframes of the TDD UL/DL configuration of radio frame n+1.) He does not teach a processor that determines whether the first timing information indicates a subframe within a specific range corresponding to one or more subframes assigned to uplink, and determines whether the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, wherein, when it is determined that the first timing information does not indicates a subframe within the specific range and that the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, the processor does not select, from among the plurality of timings, a timing based on the first timing information, selects, from among the plurality of timings, the timing based on the second timing information, However, Yin teaches a processor that determines whether the first timing information indicates a subframe within a specific range corresponding to one or more subframes assigned to uplink, ([0043] For example, the PDSCH HARQ-ACK configuration may follow a first reference UL/DL configuration with a number (e.g., minimum number) of UL subframes in the allowed UL/DL reconfiguration range. The first reference UL/DL configuration may or may not be the same as a default UL/DL configuration.) and determines whether the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, ([0044] The PUSCH scheduling and PUSCH HARQ-ACK timing of a dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration cell may follow a second reference UL/DL configuration with a number (e.g., maximum number) of UL subframes in the allowed UL/DL reconfiguration range.) wherein, when it is determined that the first timing information does not indicates a subframe within the specific range and that the second timing information indicates a subframe within the specific range, the processor does not select, from among the plurality of timings, a timing based on the first timing information, ([0076] If the UL/DL configurations have different periodicity, the first reference UL/DL configuration is a configuration defined by the fixed UL allocations among all configured configurations, and the second reference UL/DL configuration is defined by the fixed DL or special subframe allocations among all configured UL/DL configurations.) selects, from among the plurality of timings, the timing based on the second timing information, ([0076] The first reference UL/DL configuration (e.g., the DL-reference UL/DL configuration) and the second reference UL/DL configuration (e.g., the UL-reference UL/DL configuration) may be selected from the seven existing TDD UL/DL configurations.) in order to increase system efficiency by reducing reconfigurations by supporting dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration ([0046]) He and Yin are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in He with the technique of dynamic UL/DL reconfiguration in order to increase system efficiency. Regarding claim 5. He and Pelletier teaches A system comprising: a terminal performing the method in claim 4. It is rejected for the same reasons. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHAOHUI YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7527. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM to 5 PM M-F. 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, Marcus Smith can be reached on 571 270-1096. 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. /ZHAOHUI YANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2468 /MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2018
Application Filed
Sep 27, 2019
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 06, 2020
Response Filed
Jun 30, 2020
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 04, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 16, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 16, 2020
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 06, 2020
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 14, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 23, 2020
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 29, 2021
Response Filed
May 04, 2021
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 13, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2021
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 13, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 15, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
May 19, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 26, 2022
Response Filed
Nov 30, 2022
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 02, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 07, 2023
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 29, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 30, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 25, 2023
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 25, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 21, 2023
Response Filed
Feb 09, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
May 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
May 15, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 20, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 27, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 10, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 05, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 02, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12550152
AVAILABLE SLOT DETERMINATION FOR APERIODIC SRS TRIGGERING BASED ON AN UNCONFIGURED DCI CODE POINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543061
BEAM QUALITY ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUES IN DISCONTINUOUS RECEPTION (DRX) MODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12538280
SPATIAL REUSE METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12501288
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SELECTING A MACHINE LEARNING MODEL THAT PREDICTS A SUBSCRIBER NETWORK EXPERIENCE IN A GEOGRAPHIC AREA
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12489505
IMPROVING PRECODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
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

13-14
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+11.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 391 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