Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/620,903

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NR UE USE OF LTE REFERENCE SIGNALS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 20, 2021
Examiner
VAN ROIE, JUSTIN T
Art Unit
2469
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
285 granted / 345 resolved
+24.6% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+40.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
390
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 345 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10 November 2025 has been entered. Claim Status During the interview conducted on 18 March 2026, the applicant’s representative and the examiner confirmed that the current claims under examination are the claims filed 3 June 2025 with the exception of claim 8 being canceled. Therefore, claim 8 is hereby canceled. 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 . 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9-15, 17-18, 24, and 26 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 § 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)(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, 3, 5-7, 13, 15, 17-18, 24, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by John Wilson et al. US 2018/0332567 (hereinafter referred to as “John Wilson”). As to claims 1 and 24, AT&T teaches a method performed by a New Radio, NR, wireless device for increasing throughput (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, and 165; figures 11-14), the method comprising: receiving a configuration for at least one Long Term Evolution, LTE, reference signal (¶124; figure 11: UE receives configuration info for LTE band RS resources); and using the at least one LTE reference signal (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14: UE determines channel state feedback based on the LTE reference signal); wherein the at least one LTE reference signal is an LTE Cell-specific Reference Signal, CRS (¶¶53 and 124; figure 11: LTE reference signal is CRS for example), and using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: using the LTE CRS for Channel State Information, CSI, feedback when the LTE CRS is configured with 1, 2, or 4 ports for the CSI feedback (¶¶52, 54-55, 106, 124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14: UE performs channel measurements on the receives LTE RS (e.g., CRS) and transmits UCI/CSI for NR when the reference signal is configured for MIMO antenna ports (i.e., 1, 2, or 4)). As to claim 3, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1 wherein using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises at least one of the group consisting of: performing a channel state measurement and/or feedback (¶¶124, 135-136, 151-152, 160, 162, and 165; figures 11-14: use LTE RS in performing channel state measurements and CSF/UCI transmission); performing time and/or frequency tracking; and using the at least one LTE reference signal as a quasi-co-located, QCL, source (¶¶105, 107, and 113; figures 9-10: LTE RS used for QCL). As to claim 5, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1 wherein using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: only using the at least one LTE reference signal within an active NR bandwidth part for CSI measurement (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14). As to claim 6, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1 wherein receiving the configuration for the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: receiving higher layer signaling of an LTE physical cell ID (¶¶60, 99-100, 102, 106, and 112-113; figures 9-10). As to claims 13 and 26, John Wilson teaches a method performed by a base station for increasing throughput (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, and 165; figures 11-14), the method comprising: providing, to a New Radio, NR, wireless device, a configuration for at least one Long Term Evolution, LTE, reference signal (¶124; figure 11: BS transmits configuration info for LTE band RS resources); and instructing the NR wireless device to use the at least one LTE reference signal (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14: UE determines channel state feedback based on the LTE reference signal); wherein the at least one LTE reference signal is an LTE Cell-specific Reference Signal, CRS (¶¶53 and 124; figure 11: LTE reference signal is CRS for example), and using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: using the LTE CRS for Channel State Information, CSI, feedback when the LTE CRS is configured with 1, 2, or 4 ports for the CSI feedback (¶¶52, 54-55, 106, 124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14: UE performs channel measurements on the receives LTE RS (e.g., CRS) and transmits UCI/CSI for NR when the reference signal is configured for MIMO antenna ports (i.e., 1, 2, or 4). As to claim 15, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 13 wherein using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises at least one of the group consisting of: performing a channel state measurement and/or feedback (¶¶124, 135-136, 151-152, 160, 162, and 165; figures 11-14: use LTE RS in performing channel state measurements and CSF/UCI transmission); performing time and/or frequency tracking; and using the at least one LTE reference signal as a quasi-co-located, QCL, source (¶¶105, 107, and 113; figures 9-10: LTE RS used for QCL). As to claim 17, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 13 wherein using the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: only using the at least one LTE reference signal within an active NR bandwidth part for CSI measurement (¶¶124, 135-136, 160, 162, 165; figures 11-12 and 14). As to claim 18, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 13 wherein providing the configuration for the at least one LTE reference signal comprises: providing higher layer signaling of an LTE physical cell ID (¶¶60, 99-100, 102, 106, and 112-113; figures 9-10). 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) 2, 9-10, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over John Wilson in view of AT&T 3GPP R1-1804650 “Further details of PDSCH time-domain resource allocation before RRC connection setup” (hereinafter referred to as “AT&T”). NOTE: AT&T was cited by the applicant in the IDS received 21 December 2021. As to claim 2, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1. Although John Wilson teaches “The method of claim 1,” John Wilson does not explicitly disclose “wherein the NR…reference signal”. However, AT&T teaches wherein the NR wireless device is configured to rate match a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH, around the at least one LTE reference signal (§2: UE rate matches the NR PDSCH around the LTE CRS). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson by including “wherein the NR…reference signal” as taught by AT&T because it provides John Wilson’s method with the enhanced capability of improving LTE/NR coexistence (AT&T, §2). As to claim 9, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1. Although John Wilson teaches “The method of claim 1,” John Wilson does not explicitly disclose “wherein the at…NR wireless device”. However, AT&T teaches wherein the at least one LTE reference signal is configured as a reference signal in a Transmission Configuration Indicator, TCI, state for the NR wireless device (§2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson by including “wherein the at…NR wireless device” as taught by AT&T because it provides John Wilson’s method with the enhanced capability of improving LTE/NR coexistence (AT&T, §2). As to claim 10, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1. Although John Wilson teaches “The method of claim 1,” John Wilson does not explicitly disclose “wherein receiving…RRC, signaling”. However, AT&T teaches wherein receiving the configuration comprises: receiving the configuration for at least one LTE reference signal through Radio Resource Control, RRC, signaling (§2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson by including “wherein receiving…RRC, signaling” as taught by AT&T because it provides John Wilson’s method with the enhanced capability of improving LTE/NR coexistence (AT&T, §2). As to claim 14, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 13. Although John Wilson teaches “The method of claim 13,” John Wilson does not explicitly disclose “wherein the NR…reference signal”. However, AT&T teaches wherein the NR wireless device is configured to rate match a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH, around the at least one LTE reference signal (§2: UE rate matches the NR PDSCH around the LTE CRS). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson by including “wherein receiving…RRC, signaling” as taught by AT&T because it provides John Wilson’s method with the enhanced capability of improving LTE/NR coexistence (AT&T, §2). Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over John Wilson in view of Gheorghiu et al. US 2020/0351987 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Gheorghiu”). As to claim 11, John Wilson teaches the method of claim 1. Although John Wilson teaches “The method of claim 1”, John Wilson does not explicitly disclose “wherein the…and LTE”. However, Gheorghiu teaches wherein the NR wireless device is operating in a Dynamic Spectrum Sharing, DSS, system with co-existence of NR and LTE (¶65; figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson by including “wherein the…and LTE” as taught by Gheorghiu because it provides John Wilson’s method with the enhanced capability of efficiently re-farming spectrum between LTE and NR (Gheorghiu, ¶¶4 and 65; figure 2). As to claim 12, John Wilson in view of Gheorghiu teaches the method of claim 11. Gheorghiu further teaches wherein LTE and NR are deployed with frequency- overlapping carriers in the DSS system (¶65; figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the method described in John Wilson in view of Gheorghiu by including “wherein LTE…DSS system” as further taught by Gheorghiu for the same rationale as set forth in claim 11 (Gheorghiu, ¶¶4 and 65; figure 2). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN T VAN ROIE whose telephone number is (571)270-0308. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:30pm. 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, Ian N Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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. /JUSTIN T VAN ROIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2021
Application Filed
Feb 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 03, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 05, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598476
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATION MODE ON UNLICENSED SPECTRUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12549956
OPTIMAL NEW RADIO (NR) RESOURCE ALLOCATION USING BANDWIDTH PART (BWP) ACROSS ASYMMETRIC DSS NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543132
COORDINATED ORTHOGONAL FREQUENCY DIVISION MULTIPLE ACCESS (C-OFDMA) IN HIGH DENSITY NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12526033
APPARATUS, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR DETERMINING A SERVING BEAM USING A MEASUREMENT REPORT POOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12507265
SIDELINK RESOURCES BASED ON INTERFERENCE CANCELATION CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 345 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