Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/629,898

PACKET REDUNDANCY PROCESSING METHOD FOR SUPPORTING ENHANCED HANDOVER IN NEXT GENERATION MOBILE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, METHOD FOR PREVENTING HEADER DECOMPRESSION FAILURE DURING HANDOVER AND APPARATUS THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 25, 2022
Examiner
TRAN, THINH D
Art Unit
2466
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 5m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
330 granted / 532 resolved
+4.0% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
571
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 532 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . (note: the priority date of the application is given Mar. 4, 2020 with foreign application priority KR 10-2020-0027391 since KR 10-2019-0091556 filed on 07/29/2019 and KR 10-2019-0115657 filed on 09/19/2019 do not provide support for the claims) 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 8, 9 ,12, 13, 15 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 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. Claim(s) 1, 4, 9 ,12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R2-2000732 (“Draft CR for 38.323 on ROHC failure issue”) in view of R2-1904646 (“LTE mobility enhancements for eMBB HO using dual active protocol stack”). Regarding claims 1, 9, R2-2000732 teaches a method performed by a first base station associated with a first cell in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: identifying that a robust header compression (ROHC) protocol is configured for a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity associated with a data radio bearer (DRB) established with a user equipment (UE) (section 5.7.4, For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE); in case that the ROHC protocol operates in an unidirectional mode (U-mode) or a bidirectional optimistic mode (0-mode) during the DAPS handover before release of a-the second cell, maintaining an initialization and refresh (IR) state for the ROHC protocol used for downlink data transmission of the first cell (section 5.7.4, For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE), and transmitting IR packets to the UE (section 5.7.4; page 1, generate/transmit IR packets to the receiver until the target node sends the source release indication to UE). However, R2-2000732 does not teach receiving, from a second base station associated with a second cell, a handover request message for the UE; transmitting, to the second base station, a handover request acknowledge message indicating a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover; but, R2-1904646 in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches receiving, from a second base station associated with a second cell, a handover request message for the UE (fig. 2, step 4 HO Request); transmitting, to the second base station, a handover request acknowledge message indicating a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover (fig. 2, step 6 HO Request Ack; section 2.2, Dual stack dual active protocol stack based MBB HO enhancements); Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by R2-1904646 in the system of R2-2000732 to request handover. The motivation would have been to provide make before break handover in standard implement and easier to implement. Regarding claims 4, 12, R2-2000732 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first cell is a target cell and the second cell is a source cell of the DAPS handover (section 5.7.4, “For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE” for handover). Claim(s) 5, 8, 13, 15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R2-1904646 (“LTE mobility enhancements for eMBB HO using dual active protocol stack”) in view of R2-2000732 (“Draft CR for 38.323 on ROHC failure issue”). Regarding claims 5, 13, R2-1904646 teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: identifying a data radio bearer (DRB) configured as a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) bearer established with a base station associated with a first cell (section 2.2, the LTE MBB HO (non-split bearer architecture, dual stack dual active protocol stack) procedures…UE has established SRBs and DRBs with target eNB); identifying that a robust header compression (ROHC) protocol is configured for a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity associated with the DRB configured as the DAPS bearer (section 2.2, UE has established SRBs and DRBs with target eNB …target eNB will perform remaining PDCP functions (i.e ROHC, Security, PDCP header operation)…UE common PDCP will have to maintain separate ROHC context for each eNB during HO); receiving, from the base station, radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message indicating a DAPS handover (fig. 2, step 7; section 2.2, a RRC connection Reconfiguration Request); and during the DAPS handover before release of a second cell, maintain separate ROHC context for each eNB (fig. 2, section 2.2). However, R2-1904646 does not teach in case that the ROHC protocol operates in an unidirectional mode (U-mode) or a bidirectional optimistic mode (0-mode) during the DAPS handover before release of a second cell, receiving initialization and refresh (IR) packets from the base station maintaining an IR state for the ROHC protocol of the first cell. But, R2-2000732 in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches identifying a data radio bearer (DRB) configured as a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) bearer established with a base station associated with a first cell (section 5.7.4, For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE); identifying that a robust header compression (ROHC) protocol is configured for a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity associated with the DRB configured as the DAPS bearer (section 5.7.4, For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE); in case that the ROHC protocol operates in an unidirectional mode (U-mode) or a bidirectional optimistic mode (0-mode) during the DAPS handover before release of a second cell, receiving initialization and refresh (IR) packets from the base station maintaining an IR state for the ROHC protocol of the first cell (section 5.7.4, For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE; page 1, generate/transmit IR packets to the receiver until the target node sends the source release indication to UE). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by R2-2000732 in the system of R2-1904646 to maintain IR state. The motivation would have been to prevent ROHC decompression failure issue. Regarding claims 8, 15, R2-2000732 teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the first cell is a target cell and the second cell is a source cell of the DAPS (section 5.7.4, “For downlink transmission of DAPS bears in target cell, the header compression for the PDCP SDU in transmitting PDCP entity shall start with and keep an IR state in U-mode until the source cell is released in UE” for handover). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6. 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, FARUK HAMZA can be reached at 5712727969. 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. /THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 01/24/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 22, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 02, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 22, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 22, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 04, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 10, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 05, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 16, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 16, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 19, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 20, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603833
ALLOCATING A PACKET TO A MEDIA SESSION CONTROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12568531
MESSAGE SENDING METHOD AND DEVICE, MESSAGE CONFIGURATION METHOD AND DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557150
Radio Resource Control RRC Connection Method and Apparatus and RRC Reconnection Method and Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12543201
Access Procedure Resource Configuration
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12543233
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, AND PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+20.0%)
4y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 532 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