Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 17/148,072

RANDOM ACCESS METHOD AND DATA RECEPTION METHOD, APPARATUSES THEREOF AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 13, 2021
Priority
Aug 31, 2018 — continuation of PCTCN2018103610
Examiner
NGUYEN, CHUONG M
Art Unit
2411
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
1FINITY Inc.
OA Round
9 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
9-10
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
343 granted / 473 resolved
+14.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
529
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
67.7%
+27.7% vs TC avg
§102
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 473 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION a. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, and 21 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . - claim 1 is amended b. This is a first action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 06/10/2026. Response to Arguments Regarding Independent claim 1 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2), Applicant's arguments, see “However, Shih does not disclose receiving the PDCCH on the cell where the beam failure recovery request is transmitted, nor "the downlink control channel transmission is received on a same cell as the first cell on which the random access preamble is transmitted," as recited in Applicant' claim 1.” on page 5, filed on 06/10/2026, with respect to Shih et al. (US Pub 2019/0182870, claiming provisional application 62598078 priority 2017-12-13, hereinafter "Shih"), have been fully considered but are moot, over the limitations of “when the downlink control channel transmission is received on a same cell as the first cell on which the random access preamble is transmitted”. Said limitations are newly added to the amended Claim 1 and have been addressed in instant office action, as shown in section 35 USC 103 rejection below, with newly identified prior art teaching from newly found reference Cirik et al. US Pub 2019/0253941, claiming provisional application 62629936 priority 2018-02-13 (hereinafter “Cirik”) in combination with previously applied reference Shih, thus rendering said Applicant’s arguments moot. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 of this title, 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. 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. Claims 1, 6, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shih et al. US Pub 2019/0182870, claiming provisional application 62598078 priority 2017-12-13 (hereinafter “Shih”), and in view of Cirik et al. US Pub 2019/0253941, claiming provisional application 62629936 priority 2018-02-13 (hereinafter “Cirik”). Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended) Shih discloses a random access apparatus (“a receiver system 250 (also known as access terminal (AT) or user equipment (UE)” [0021]; Fig. 2) configured with a first cell (“the UE initiates a RA procedure on a first Serving Cell” [0655]) and a second cell different from the first cell (“for the RA procedure, in the event a Msg1 transmission and a Msg2 reception are performed on different Serving Cells, namely the first Serving Cell and a second Serving Cell” [0656]), comprising: a transmitter (“TX data processor 238” in Fig. 2; [0029]) configured to transmit a random access preamble on the first cell for beam failure recovery request (“the set of Random Access Preambles for beam failure recovery request and corresponding PRACH resource(s)” [0480]) to a network device (“a transmitter system 210 (also known as the access network)” in Fig. 2; [0021]); a receiver (“RX data processor 260” in Fig. 2; [0027]) configured to receive a first notification (i.e. “Random Access Response message”), the first notification is a notification of reception of a downlink control channel transmission (i.e. “PDCCH”) and is received from a lower layer of the terminal equipment (“if notification of a reception of a PDCCH transmission is received from lower layers” [0418]); and processor circuitry (“processor 270” in Fig. 2; [0028]) configured to determine that a random access procedure corresponding to the random access preamble is successfully completed (“consider the Random Access procedure successfully completed. the UL grant provided in the Random Access Response message is valid only for the configured carrier.” [0376-0377]) for a multi-carrier scenario (“when multiple carriers provide PRACH resources for the same enhanced coverage level, the UE will randomly select one of them using the following selection probabilities” [0281]) when the downlink control channel transmission is received on the first cell (“the UE initiates a RA procedure on a first Serving Cell. The UE states a first BWP timer for the first Serving Cell when successfully decoding a PDCCH on the first Serving Cell at the first time during the RA procedure.” [0655]). Shih does not specifically teach determine that a random access procedure corresponding to the random access preamble is successfully completed for a multi- carrier scenario when the downlink control channel transmission is received on a same cell as the first cell on which the random access preamble is transmitted. In an analogous art, Cirik discloses determine that a random access procedure corresponding to the random access preamble is successfully completed for a multi-carrier scenario when the downlink control channel transmission is received on a same cell as the first cell on which the random access preamble is transmitted (“The wireless device 2601 may send (e.g., transmit), in a first slot, the preamble via the PRACH resource (e.g., the BFRQ resource) on the first cell (e.g., the PCell 2605) for a BFR procedure of the second cell 2603, for example, after or in response to detecting the beam failure on the second cell and identifying the first RS of the second cell. The wireless device 2601 may start, from a second slot, monitoring, within a response window, a PDCCH in one or more coresets on the first cell 2605 for a DCI, for example, after or in response to sending (e.g., transmitting) the preamble in the first slot. The DCI may be configured with a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled by a C-RNTI.” [0427]) Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shih’s method of handling a BWP inactivity timer during a random access procedure in a wireless communication system, to include Cirik’s method for sending a preamble via a time-frequency resource associated with a primary/first cell to perform BFR procedure, in order to complete a multi-carrier scenario “Cirik [Abstract]". Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Cirik’s method for sending a preamble via a time-frequency resource associated with a primary/first cell to perform BFR procedure into Shih’s method of handling a BWP inactivity timer during a random access procedure in a wireless communication system since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. Regarding claim 6 Shih, as modified by Cirik, previously discloses the random access apparatus according to claim 1, Shih further discloses wherein the downlink control channel transmission (i.e. “PDCCH”) is addressed to a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) (“wherein the UE considers the contention-based RA procedure successfully completed if a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) addressed to a Cell Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI) of the UE is received and the PDCCH contains an uplink grant for a new transmission.” [0005]) or a random access radio network temporary identifier (RA-RNTI) (“the MAC entity shall monitor the PDCCH of the SpCell for Random Access Response(s) identified by the RA-RNTI defined below, in the RA Response window which starts at the subframe that contains the end of the preamble transmission” [0363]). Cirik further discloses wherein the downlink control channel transmission (i.e. “PDCCH”) is addressed to a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) or a random access radio network temporary identifier (RA-RNTI) (“The wireless device may monitor a PDCCH of a cell for at least one random access response identified by a RA-RNTI, or for at least one response to beam failure recovery request identified by a C-RNTI, at a time that a timer for a time window is running.” [0294]). Regarding claim 21 Shih, as modified by Cirik, previously discloses the random access apparatus according to claim 1, Shih further discloses wherein a plurality of cells (“For a UE, the PCell, PSCell and each SCell has a single associated SSB in frequency (RAN1 terminology is the is the ‘cell defining SSB’)” Table 1) including the first cell are configured to communicate (“for the RA procedure, in the event a Msg1 transmission and a Msg2 reception are performed on different Serving Cells, namely the first Serving Cell and a second Serving Cell” [0656]) with the random access apparatus (“a receiver system 250 (also known as access terminal (AT) or user equipment (UE)” [0021]; Fig. 2). Cirik further discloses wherein a plurality of cells (“primary secondary cell (e.g., PSCell, PCell of SCG, PCell)” [0285]; “Secondary Cells (SCells)” [0208]) including the first cell are configured to communicate with the random access apparatus (“A wireless device may initiate a random access procedure associated with a primary cell, for example, if it detects a beam failure of a secondary cell. If the secondary cell is deactivated, the wireless device may abort the random access procedure associated with the primary cell” [0004]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm. 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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. /CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 14 earlier events
Sep 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jan 12, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jun 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12701617
METHOD AND NETWORK NODE OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORK FOR HANDLING RANDOM ACCESS
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12696339
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPORTING LAYER-2 MOBILITY
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12689546
PRE-ALLOCATED RANDOM ACCESS IDENTIFIERS
5y 3m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12690070
TERMINAL APPARATUS, BASE STATION APPARATUS, AND COMMUNICATION METHOD
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12647949
TERMINAL AND TRANSMISSION METHOD
4y 4m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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

9-10
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+19.6%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 473 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