Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 16/735,504

HANDLING OF CHANNEL ACCESS PROBLEMS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jan 06, 2020
Priority
Jan 07, 2019 — provisional 62/789,473
Examiner
VU, HUY DUY
Art Unit
2461
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
10 (Non-Final)
39%
Grant Probability
At Risk
10-11
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 39% of cases
39%
Career Allowance Rate
13 granted / 33 resolved
-18.6% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+47.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
49
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
66.4%
+26.4% vs TC avg
§102
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 33 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 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. Claim 6 is 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. Regarding claim 6, line 2-3, the phrase “resetting counters or timers for higher access priorities” renders the claim vague and indefinite since it is not clear as to what these higher access priorities are compared to. Furthermore, it is also not clear where these counters or timers for the higher access priorities come from since they were not recited previously. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Babaei (US 10979128) (herein after Babaei’ 128). Regarding claims 1, 19, 24 and 30, Babaei’128 teaches a method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: determining to send a transmission to a first base station on a first unlicensed frequency channel of an unlicensed frequency spectrum, wherein the first base station has multiple secondary cells and the first unlicensed frequency channel is provided by a first secondary cell (PCell or SCell) of the first base station (figures 1B, 11B, 12A, SCells; Col. 3, lines 25-28; Col. 17, lines 7 to col 18, line 56; col. 45, lines 30-42; When UE needs to transmit, it sends Msg1 to the BS to request resource for its transmission); determining, for one or more attempts of a listen before talk (LBT) protocol, whether each attempt is a failed attempt or a successful attempt (See col. 33, line 30 to col. 34, line 35; figure 17); determining that the first unlicensed frequency channel is one of: unavailable based on the LBT protocol failing due to at least one of a number of failed attempts exceeding a first threshold number of failed attempts or a duration of failed attempts exceeding a first threshold duration (See col. 33, line 30 to col. 34, line 35; figure 17), or available based on at least one attempt of the LBT protocol being successful for the transmission (See col. 33, line 30 to col. 34, line 35; figure 17); and sending a MAC CE indication from the UE (wireless device) to the first base station indicating whether the first unlicensed frequency channel is unavailable or available, wherein the MAC CE is sent through another cell of the first base station (See figure 17, where the LBT indication MAC CE is sent from the wireless device to the BS through a cell that is not the 1st cell; Fig 24-26; Col. 34, lines 49-57; Col. 47, line 8 to col. 50, line 20), wherein the MAC CE includes an identification of the 1st secondary cell among multiple secondary cells providing the 1st unlicensed frequency channel (Col. 34, lines 36-48). Regarding claim 2, Babaei’ 128 further teaches that UE may transmit scheduling request (SR) (col. 36, lines 37-44), Random access channel (RACH) procedure on PUSCH (col. 28, lines 33-63), or sounding reference signal (SRS) (col. 22, lines 36-49 and col. 28, lines 33-63) to the base station. Regarding claims 3 and 20, Babaei’128 further teaches the step of maintaining one or more counters associated with the number of failed attempts based on LBT protocol and resetting the counters (See col. 33, line 30-50; resetting the counters based on RRC reconfiguration msg which would specify available resources for transmission). Regarding claims 4, 5, 18 & 25, Babaei’128 further teaches the maintaining 1st timer (See SR counter) for 1st type of transmissions outside of transmission opportunities and 2nd timer (See BWP switching or LBT timer) for 2nd type of transmission inside of transmission opportunities (SR transmission happens outside of transmission opportunities and BWP switching or LBT transmissions happen within the transmission opportunities). These separate counters are maintained separately. Regarding claim 6, Babaei’128 further teaches resetting the counters/timers for higher access priorities (See col. 33, line 30-50; where Babaei’128 teaches resetting the counters based on RRC reconfiguration msg which would specify available resources for transmission. In this case all access priorities are interpreted as higher access priorities). Regarding claims 7, 15 and 23, Babaei’128 further teaches that the wireless device may perform radio link failure (RLF) recovery based on the consistent uplink LBT failure being detected on the PCell and consistent uplink LBT failure being detected on N possible BWPs of the PCell. In an example, based on detecting/determining consistent uplink LBT failures on a PSCell and after detecting a consistent uplink LBT failure on N BWPs of the PSCell, the wireless device may indicate a failure to a master base station via a secondary cell group (SCG) failure information procedure. In other words, the threshold for RLF failure is at least N times the threshold for an LBT failure (see col. 34, lines 29-44). Regarding claims 8 and 26, Babaei’128 further teaches that the MAC CE includes number of failed attempts (see Babaei’128; col. 34, lines 36-58 where Babaei’128 teaches that the MAC CE indicates LBT failures on one or more cells). Regarding claims 9 and 27, Babaei’128 further teaches that the MAC CE includes RSRP/RSRQ/RSSI (See col. 35 lines 40-45). Regarding claim 10, Babaei’128 further teaches that the UE may also send report to the base station including RSRP/RSRQ/RSSI (See col. 24, lines 28-42; col. 35, lines 40-45). Regarding claim 11, Babaei’128 further teaches that the cells includes deactivated cell(s) (See col. 17, lines 7-41; col. 22, lines 18-25) Regarding claim 12, Babaei’128 further teaches the MAC CE is transmitted to the primary cell of the base station (lines col. 34, lines 36-58). Regarding claim 13, Babaei’128 further teaches receiving a command from the first base station Regarding claims 14, 22 and 29, Babaei’128 further teaches moving in a handover from the original serving base station to a neighboring base station (See col. 13, lines 16-28). Once the UE is handed over to the neighboring base station, the UE would then send the reports to the neighboring base station instead of the original serving base station. Regarding claim 16, Babaei’128 further teaches that the MAC SDUs are multiplexed to form a transport block. The MAC layer may multiplex one or more MAC control elements (MAC CEs) with zero or more MAC SDUs to form a transport block (set of MAC CEs) (See col. 10, lines 25-40). Regarding claim 17, Babaei’128 further teaches determining LBT successes or failures on unlicensed spectrum (See col. 33, line 19 to col. 36, line 36; col. 47, lines 8-21; col. 51, lines 15-27). Regarding claims 21 and 28, Babaei’128 further teaches receiving a command from the 1st base station indicating deactivation of 1st SCell and activation of 2nd SCell via MAC CE and UE’s changing from the 1st SCell to 2nd SCell (Col. 17, lines 7-22; col. 22, lines 18-25). Regarding claim 24, Babaei’128 further teaches memory for storing instructions at UE and BS (See 25, lines 54-65). Regarding claim 31, Babaei’s 128’s teaches that the activated or deactivated status of the SCell are indicated via the bitmap sent to the UE (See col. 17, lines 7-22). Thus, UE may monitor the activated or deactivated status of the cells via the bitmap. Regarding claim 32, Babaei’128 further teaches multiple secondary cells of the base station (See col. 17, lines 7-22). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Babaei (US 10,980,062) teaches A wireless device determining uplink LBT failure recovery. The wireless device may receive a first uplink grant for transmission of a first TB via a first cell. The wireless device may determine, based on an LBT counter not reaching a first number, that consistent LBT failures is not triggered for the first cell. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY D VU whose telephone number is (571)272-3155. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00a-to 5:00p Mon-Thurs. 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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at (571)272-0734. 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. HUY D. VU Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit 2461 /HUY D VU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 25 earlier events
Dec 10, 2024
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Mar 10, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 24, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Aug 22, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 22, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677286
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND NETWORK DEVICE
4y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12563612
TIMING ADVANCE ACQUISITION, MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING
2y 10m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550032
Communication Method and Device
3y 7m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12532197
CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION MEASUREMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS
3y 4m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12532366
NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM STORING COMPUTER-READABLE INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMMUNICATION DEVICE, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, AND METHOD PERFORMED BY COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 6m 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

10-11
Expected OA Rounds
39%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+47.0%)
3y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 33 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