Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/214,797

INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD AND INFORMATION TRANSMISSION APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 26, 2021
Examiner
NGO, ANGELIE THIEN THAN
Art Unit
2416
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
42 granted / 57 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
96
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 57 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 29-36 have been amended; Claims 1-28 have been canceled; No Claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 29-36 are subject to examination. 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 filed 01/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s Arguments: The applicant argues in substance that BERGMAN in view of LEE and SALIM does not teach the limitations of claim 1, especially in regards to (1) “a single piece of downlink control information” indicating (2) “a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block”, wherein (3) “the first transport block and the second transport block corresponding to the same transport block size” contain the (4) “same data information”. Examiner’s Response: The examiner respectfully disagrees. BERGMAN teaches (1) “a single piece of downlink control information” scheduling a plurality of transport blocks, including a first and second transport block, using at least 1 set of transmission parameters (para 15 (“…where the DCI includes at least one parameter that is configured to be applied to the plurality of TBs…”) and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”)), wherein two of the repeating transport blocks of a scheduled plurality of transport block repetition, in this case that would mean any 2 of the 4 transport block repetitions on PDCCH, are the (3) “the first transport block and the second transport block corresponding to the same transport block size” (para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) and para 130 (“…a single field in the DCI is used…to indicate a size of all the TBs…That is the same size is applied to all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI…”)). Since the transport blocks are repetition, they contain the (4) “same data information”. While BERGMAN does not explicitly disclose (2) “a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have combined BERGMAN with SALIM. SALIM, in the same field of endeavor, teaches (1) “a single piece of downlink control information” at the beginning of a slot scheduling a plurality of transport blocks within the slot, including a first and second transport block (FIG. 2 and para 52 (“The TB may be repeated directly or different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection”)), by indicating (2) “a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block”, where each of the sets of transmission parameters can include unique redundancy versions (FIG. 3, para 52 (“The TB may be repeated directly or different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection”), and para 53 (“…using different frequency resources…different mini-slots…”)). Like, BERGMAN, the method of SALIM is directed to the first transport block and the second transport block containing the (4) “same data information” (para 52 (“The TB may be repeated…”)). In response to applicant's argument that it is not obvious to combine BERGMAN in view of LEE and SALIM to teach the limitations of the amended claims, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, BERGMAN teaches limitations (1), (3), and (4); while the teachings of analogous art SALIM suggest a combination with limitation (2) to disclose an invention reading on the limitations of the amended claims. The teachings of analogous art LEE suggest a combination with the steps of sending notification information, notifying capability and receiving configuration information based on the notification information (see non-final rejection 10/20/2025). The examiner recommends further defining the “first set of transmission parameters” and the “second set of transmission parameters” by including language that would indicate what kind of parameters are different between the first set and the second set. Regarding all other arguments presented by the applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the examiner directs the applicant to those response above. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will reformat the arguments below. 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, 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. Claim(s) 29, 31, 33 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BERGMAN et al. (US 20210298058 A1), hereby referred to as BERGMAN, in view of LEE et al. (US 20200187177 A1) (see priority document 62/659,674 pg 25-26) (see 892 10/20/2025), hereby referred to as LEE, and in further view of SALIM et al. (US 20210289522 A1) (see 892 10/20/2025), hereby referred to as SALIM. Claim 29: BERGMAN teaches a communications method performed by an apparatus to receive a first transport block and a second transport block that carry same data information and correspond to a same transport block size (TBS) (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) wherein at least two transport blocks are received, a first transport block and a repetition of the transport block); receiving, from the network device, a single piece of downlink control information (DCI) that indicates transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block (BERGMAN: FIG. 8, para 15 (“…where the DCI includes at least one parameter that is configured to be applied to the plurality of TBs…”), and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) wherein transmission parameters are indicate by DCI for first and second TB), obtaining, based on the DCI a target TBS that is the TBS for the first transport block and the second transport block that carry the same data information (BERGMAN: FIG. 8, para 127 (“…except TB size which is derived from the parameters of the initial transmission.”) and para 130 (“…a single field in the DCI is used…to indicate a size of all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI. That is the same size is applied to all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI.”) wherein a size is obtained from the parameters for a first TB/initial transmission in DCI and applied to all TB repetitions; wherein TB repetitions carry same data); and receiving, in accordance with the target BS and the transmission parameters, the first transport block and the second transport block that carry same data information (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) wherein at least two transport blocks are received, a first transport block and a repetition of the transport block). While, BERGMAN teaches the apparatus is configured to receive two transport blocks corresponding to a same transport block size (TBS) obtained from one of the two transport blocks that carry same data information (BERGMAN: FIG. 8, para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) , and para 127 (“…except TB size which is derived from the parameters of the initial transmission.”) and para 130 (“…a single field in the DCI is used…to indicate a size of all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI. That is the same size is applied to all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI.”) wherein a size is obtained from the parameters for a first TB/initial transmission in DCI and applied to all TBs which are repetitions of each other/carry same data information.), BERGMAN does not explicitly disclose sending, to a network device, notification information that is used to notify the network device that the apparatus has a capability of receiving first transport block and the second transport block; receiving, from the network device in accordance with the sending notification information notifying the network device, configuration information that is used to configure the apparatus to be capable of receiving the first transport block and the second transport block; and wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters; wherein the configuration information is different from the DCI. LEE, in the same field of endeavor, teaches sending, to a network device, notification information that is used to notify the network device that the apparatus has a capability of receiving first transport block and the second transport block (LEE: FIG. 19 item 1901 (“Transmit, to a base station (BS), capability information including the first information indicating support for a PDSCH repetition-related operation”) wherein an apparatus can send a notification/capability information indicating that it can receive two transport blocks/repetitions); and receiving, from the network device in accordance with the sending notification information notifying the network device, configuration information that is used to configure the apparatus to be capable of receiving the first transport block and the second transport block (LEE: FIG. 19 item S1902 (“Receive, from the BS, a higher layer signal included the second information for configuring whether to enable the PDSCH repetition-related operation.”)), wherein the configuration information is different from the DCI (LEE: FIG. 19 item 1903 (“Receive, from the BS, downlink control information (DCI) related to reception of a PDSCH repetition…”) wherein DCI and configuration is different). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified receiving two transport blocks corresponding to a same TBS and carry same data information in PDSCH TB repetitions of BERGMAN with the notification and configuration for receiving PDSCH TB repetitions of LEE, the combination hereby referred to as BERGMAN-LEE, for the benefit of improving transmission reliability (LEE: para 271). While BERGMAN-LEE teaches the DCI indicating a set of transmission parameters for the first transport block and second transport block (BERGMAN: para 15 (“…where the DCI includes at least one parameter that is configured to be applied to the plurality of TBs…”)), BERGMAN-LEE does not explicitly disclose wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters. SALIM, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters (SALIM: para 49-55 (“…the DCI of the PDCCH at the start of the slot indicates scheduling…indicating the repetitions…different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection…benefit from different forms of diversity…repetitions are scheduled in the two mini-slots on the same time resource, but using different frequency resources to benefit from frequency diversity…in different mini-slots, but at the same frequency…to benefit form time diversity…The transmission may be scheduled using DCI in the PDCCH of the first slot which defines resources for all the repetitions…”) wherein DCI indicates a first set of parameters/resources for a first transport block/first repetition and a second set of parameters/resources for a second transport block/second repetition). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified BERGMAN-LEE with SALIM, the combination hereby referred to as BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM for the benefit of minimizing control overhead (SALIM: para 55) and increase diversity to improve the probability of successful data detection (SALIM: para 51-53). Claim 31: BERGMAN teaches A communications method performed by an apparatus to send a first transport block and a second transport block that carry same data information and correspond to a same transport block size (TBS) (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”)), the method comprising: sending, to the terminal device, a single piece of downlink control information (DCI), that indicates transmission parameters for a first transport block and transmission parameters for a second transport block (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) wherein at least two transport blocks are scheduled/indicated, a first transport block and a repetition of the transport block/second transport block), wherein the DCI indicates a target TBS that is a TBS corresponding to the first transport block and the second transport block (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 wherein the first transport block and second transport block are repetitions of the same data information, para 127 (“…except TB size which is derived from the parameters of the initial transmission.”) and para 130 (“…a single field in the DCI is used…to indicate a size of all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI. That is the same size is applied to all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI.”) wherein a size is obtained from the parameters for a first TB/initial transmission in DCI and applied to all TBs), and sending in accordance with sending the single piece of DCI, the first transport block and the second transport block that carry same data information (BERGMAN: FIG. 8 and para 58 (“…scheduling…transport blocks each with 4 repetitions on PDCCH with a single DCI…”) wherein at least two transport blocks are scheduled/sent, a first transport block and a repetition of the transport block/second transport block; wherein repetitions carry same data information). While BERGMAN teaches a second apparatus is configured to receive two transport blocks corresponding to a same transport block size (TBS) obtained from one of the two transport blocks carrying same data information (BERGMAN: FIG. 8, para 127 (“…except TB size which is derived from the parameters of the initial transmission.”) and para 130 (“…a single field in the DCI is used…to indicate a size of all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI. That is the same size is applied to all the TBs that are scheduled by the same DCI.”) wherein a size is obtained from the parameters for a first TB/initial transmission in DCI and applied to all repetitions of TBs), BERGMAN does not explicitly disclose receiving, from a terminal device, notification information, that is used to notify the apparatus that the terminal device has a capability of receiving a first transport block and a second transport block; sending, to the terminal device in accordance with receiving notification information, configuration information that is used to configure the terminal device to be capable of receiving the first transport block and the second transport block; wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters; and wherein the configuration information is different from the DCI. LEE, in the same field of endeavor, teaches receiving, from a terminal device, notification information, that is used to notify the apparatus that the terminal device has a capability of receiving a first transport block and a second transport block (LEE: FIG. 19 item 1901 (“Transmit, to a base station (BS), capability information including the first information indicating support for a PDSCH repetition-related operation”) wherein an apparatus can send a notification/capability information indicating that it can receive two transport blocks/repetitions); sending, to the terminal device in accordance with receiving notification information, configuration information that is used to configure the terminal device to be capable of receiving the first transport block and the second transport block (LEE: FIG. 19 item S1902 (“Receive, from the BS, a higher layer signal included the second information for configuring whether to enable the PDSCH repetition-related operation.”)), wherein the configuration information is different from the DCI (LEE: FIG. 19 item 1903 (“Receive, from the BS, downlink control information (DCI) related to reception of a PDSCH repetition…”) wherein DCI and configuration is different). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified receiving two transport blocks corresponding to a same TBS in PDSCH TB repetitions carrying same data information of BERGMAN with the notification and configuration for receiving PDSCH TB repetitions of LEE, the combination hereby referred to as BERGMAN-LEE, for the benefit of improving transmission reliability (LEE: para 271). While BERGMAN-LEE teaches the DCI indicating a set of transmission parameters for the first transport block and second transport block (BERGMAN: para 15 (“…where the DCI includes at least one parameter that is configured to be applied to the plurality of TBs…”)), BERGMAN-LEE does not explicitly disclose wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters. SALIM, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the DCI indicates a first set of transmission parameters for transmitting the first transport block and a second set of transmission parameters for transmitting the second transport block, and wherein the first set of transmission parameters differs from the second set of transmission parameters (SALIM: para 49-55 (“…the DCI of the PDCCH at the start of the slot indicates scheduling…indicating the repetitions…different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection…benefit from different forms of diversity…repetitions are scheduled in the two mini-slots on the same time resource, but using different frequency resources to benefit from frequency diversity…in different mini-slots, but at the same frequency…to benefit form time diversity…The transmission may be scheduled using DCI in the PDCCH of the first slot which defines resources for all the repetitions…”) wherein DCI indicates a first set of parameters/resources for a first transport block/first repetition and a second set of parameters/resources for a second transport block/second repetition). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified BERGMAN-LEE with SALIM, the combination hereby referred to as BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM for the benefit of minimizing control overhead (SALIM: para 55) and increase diversity to improve the probability of successful data detection (SALIM: para 51-53). Claim 33: BERGMAN teaches an apparatus, comprising: a memory configured to store instructions (BERMAN: FIG. 14 item 88 (“Memory”)); and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to perform operations (BERGMAN: FIG. 14 item 86 (“Processor”)). For further limitations, see rejection for claim 29 above. Claim 35: BERGMAN teaches an apparatus, comprising: a memory configured to store instructions (BERMAN: FIG. 14 item 72 (“Memory”)); and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to perform operations (BERGMAN: FIG. 14 item 70 (“Processor”)). For further limitations, see rejection for claim 31 above. Claim(s) 30, 32, 34, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BERGMAN in view of LEE and SALIM, the combination hereby referred to as BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM, and in further view of HU et al. (US 20210298057 A1) (see 892 10/06/2023), hereby referred to as HU. Claim 30: BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM teaches the method according to claim 29, wherein the obtaining the target TBS based on the first set of transmission parameters the DCI (BERGMAN: para 127 (“…except TB size which is derived from the parameters of the initial transmission.”) wherein target TBS is based on transmission parameters) (SALIM: para 49-55 (“…the DCI of the PDCCH at the start of the slot indicates scheduling…indicating the repetitions…different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection…benefit from different forms of diversity…repetitions are scheduled in the two mini-slots on the same time resource, but using different frequency resources to benefit from frequency diversity…in different mini-slots, but at the same frequency…to benefit form time diversity…The transmission may be scheduled using DCI in the PDCCH of the first slot which defines resources for all the repetitions…”) wherein DCI indicates a first set of parameters/resources for a first transport block/first repetition and a second set of parameters/resources for a second transport block/second repetition). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified BERGMAN-LEE with SALIM for the benefit of minimizing control overhead (SALIM: para 55) and increase diversity to improve the probability of successful data detection (SALIM: para 51-53). However, BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM does not explicitly disclose obtaining the target TBS based on first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information, wherein the first set of transmission parameters comprises the first MCS information. HU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches obtaining the target TBS based on first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information, wherein the first set of transmission parameters comprises the first MCS information (HU: para 7 (“…sizes of the multiple TBs are indicated through…a Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) field…”) and para 182 (“The TBs of the same type are consistent in TBS size and reuse the same signaling indicator…”) wherein DCI is used to provide a transmission parameters, such as MCS, for a TB/first TB and wherein TBS is obtained based on MCS information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM with HU for the benefit of reducing overhead (HU: para 4). Claim 32: BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM teaches the method according to claim 31, and wherein the first transmission parameters corresponds to the first transport block (SALIM: para 49-55 (“…the DCI of the PDCCH at the start of the slot indicates scheduling…indicating the repetitions…different redundancy versions of the original encoded data may be transmitted to lower the code rate to improve the probability of successful detection…benefit from different forms of diversity…repetitions are scheduled in the two mini-slots on the same time resource, but using different frequency resources to benefit from frequency diversity…in different mini-slots, but at the same frequency…to benefit form time diversity…The transmission may be scheduled using DCI in the PDCCH of the first slot which defines resources for all the repetitions…”) wherein DCI indicates a first set of parameters/resources for a first transport block/first repetition and a second set of parameters/resources for a second transport block/second repetition). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified BERGMAN-LEE with SALIM for the benefit of minimizing control overhead (SALIM: para 55) and increase diversity to improve the probability of successful data detection (SALIM: para 51-53). However, BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM does not explicitly disclose wherein the first set of transmission parameters in the DCI comprises first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information that is used to obtain the target TBS. HU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first set of transmission parameters in the DCI comprises first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information that is used to obtain the target TBS, (HU: para 7 (“…sizes of the multiple TBs are indicated through…a Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) field…”) and para 182 (“The TBs of the same type are consistent in TBS size and reuse the same signaling indicator…”) wherein DCI is used to provide a transmission parameters, such as MCS, for a TB/first TB and wherein TBS is obtained based on MCS information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified first transmission parameters corresponding to a first transport block BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM with the first transmission parameter including MCS of HU for the benefit of reducing overhead (HU: para 4). Claim 34: BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM teaches the apparatus according to claim 33. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 32 above. Claim 36: BERGMAN-LEE-SALIM teaches the communication apparatus according to claim 35. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 32 above. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm. 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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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. /A.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2416 /NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 18, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 29, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 01, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 06, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 30, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 05, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 20, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598663
METHOD, APPARATUS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587948
TRACKING AREA DETERMINING METHOD, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND CORE NETWORK DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12501465
System and Method for Scheduling Distributed Wireless Communication Based on Radar Sensing Information
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12426029
THERMAL MITIGATION IN USER EQUIPMENT HAVING MULTIPLE COMMUNICATION MODULES
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12395296
TRANSMISSION DEVICE, RECEPTION DEVICE, TRANSMISSION METHOD, AND RECEPTION METHOD FOR RANDOM ACCESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 19, 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 57 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