Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/659,444

MEASUREMENT TIMING CONFIGURATION INDICATIONS BETWEEN NETWORK NODES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 15, 2022
Examiner
ANWAR, MOHAMMAD S
Art Unit
2463
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
964 granted / 1131 resolved
+27.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1151
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§112
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1131 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/26/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Please see response below. In response to applicant arguments, However, the cited portions of ISHII do not disclose or suggest: receiving, from a second network node and via an Xn interface, cell information indicating a measurement timing parameter corresponding to a cell served by the second network node, indicating that the cell is mobile, and indicating a neighbor cell information list as recited in amended claim 13. (emphasis added) (see newly cited art Fischer discloses neighboring cell information list (see para. 00055-0056, 0058-0059, 0061 and 0088). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 13, 15-17, 19, 31, 33-35, 37, 45-48 and 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0303835 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of Ishii et al. (US 2023/0292201 A1, hereinafter “Ishii”), Dahlman et al. (US 20022/0346044 A1, hereinafter “Dahlman”) and Fischer (US 2009/0197598 A1). Regarding claim 13, Palle Venkata discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a first network node, comprising: receiving, from a second network node and via an Xn interface (see Figure 1, para. 0035, Mobile BS 108 and Mobile BS 112 are connected with Xn interface and exchanging geographical locations and neighboring base stations and cell information). Although, Palle Venkata discloses geographical locations of mobile stations but fails to mention cell information indicating that the cell is mobile and performing a communication task based at least in part on the cell information indicating that the cell is mobile. However, Ishii et al. from a similar field of endeavor discloses cell information indicating that the cell is mobile (see para. 0071, 0094-0095 and 0144, generate mobility indication is set to mobile or stationary and gathered for neighboring cells) and performing a communication task based at least in part on the cell information indicating that the cell is mobile (see para. 0134, a scenario of mobility information to a terminal). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Ishii mobility indication scheme into the cell information of Palle Venkata. The method can be implemented in a cell information. The motivation of doing this is to provide better coverage for UE. Palle Venkata and Ishi discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention explicitly cell information indicating a measurement timing parameter corresponding to a cell served by the second node. However Dahlman from a similar field of endeavor discloses cell information indicating a measurement timing parameter corresponding to a cell served by the second node (see Figure 15, para. 0043, 0082, 0101, 0203-0204, muting and not muting SSB measurement opportunity associated with SMTC; para. 0228, information exchange over Xn interface). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Dahlman timing measurement scheme into Palle Venkata and Ishi measurement scheme. The method can be implemented in a network node. The motivation of doing this is to properly coordinate inter-node SSB measurement, avoid collision and prioritized based on performance requirements and conditions (see para. 0162) . Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Ishii disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention indicating a neighbor cell information list. However, Fischer from a similar field of endeavor discloses indicating a neighbor cell information list (see para. 00055-0056, 0058-0059, 0061 and 0088, neighboring cell information). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include neighboring cell information list into Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Ishii system information. The method can be implemented in a SIB. The motivation of doing this is to reduce the system information and resources. Regarding claim 15, Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention further comprising: receiving from the second network node, cell information indicating that the cell is stationary. However, Ishii from a similar field of endeavor discloses further comprising: receiving from the second network node, cell information indicating that the cell is stationary (see para. 0071, 0094-0095 and 0144, generate mobility indication is set to mobile or stationary and gathered for neighboring cells). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Ishii mobility indication scheme into the cell information of Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Fischer. The method can be implemented in a cell information. The motivation of doing this is to provide better coverage for UE. Regarding claim 16, Palle Venkata discloses wherein the receiving the cell information indicating that the cell is stationary comprises receiving the cell information indicating that the cell is stationary via an F1 interface (see para. 0074, mobile base station provides geographical location over F1 interface). Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Fischer fails to disclose geographical location information/cell information does not include if it is stationary or mobile. However, Ishii from a similar field of endeavor discloses the mobility indication message indicating if the mobile base station is stationary or mobile (see para. 0071, 0094-0095 and 0144, generate mobility indication is set to mobile or stationary and gathered for neighboring cells). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Ishii mobility indication scheme into the geographical location/cell information of Palle Venkata, Dahlman and Fischer. The method can be implemented in a cell information. The motivation of doing this is to provide better coverage for UE. Regarding claim 17, Palle Venkata discloses wherein the cell information comprises served cell information (see para. 0056 and 0088, UE camping cell). Regarding claim 19, Palle Venkata discloses wherein the cell information corresponds to at least one of a synchronization signal block or a transmission reception point (see para. 042, SSB which allows UE to detect and associate with the serving cell). Regarding claim 31, same rejection applies as to claim 13. Regarding claim 33, same rejection applies as to claim 15. Regarding claim 34, same rejection applies as to claim 16. Regarding claim 35, same rejection applies as to claim 17. Regarding claim 37, same rejection applies as to claim 19. Regarding claim 45, same rejection applies as to claim 13. Regarding claim 46, same rejection applies as to claim 13. Regarding claim 47, same rejection applies as to claim 15. Regarding claim 48, same rejection applies as to claim 16. Regarding claim 51, Palle Venkata, Ishi and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the measurement timing parameter corresponds to the cell and at least one additional cell. However, Dahlman from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the measurement timing parameter corresponds to the cell and at least one additional cell (see para. 0080-0086, SMTC for multiple IAB nodes). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Dahlman timing measurement scheme into Palle Venkata, Ishi and Fischer measurement scheme. The method can be implemented in a network node. The motivation of doing this is to properly coordinate inter-node SSB measurement, avoid collision and prioritized based on performance requirements and conditions (see para. 0162) . Claim(s) 20-26 and 38-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata in view of Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer as applied to claim 13, and 31 above, and further in view of Yerramalli et al. (US 2020/0154446 A1). Regarding claim 20, Palle Venkata, Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the cell is associated with a fixed configuration, the fixed configuration corresponding to at least one of a synchronization signal block measurement time configuration (SMTC) window or a reception configuration window. However, Yerramalli from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the cell is associated with a fixed configuration (see para. 0110, fixed configuration for the cell), the fixed configuration corresponding to at least one of a synchronization signal block measurement time configuration (SMTC) window or a reception configuration window (see para. 0099, 101 and 106, SMTC window). Thus it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Yerramalli configuration scheme into Palle Venkata, Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer SSB scheme, The method can be implemented in SSB. The motivation of doing this is to perform measurement based on fixed configuration for the cell. Regarding claim 21, Palle Venkata , Dahlman, Ishi and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the cell information indicates the fixed configuration. However, Yerramalli from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the cell information indicates the fixed configuration (see para. 0110, fixed configuration for the cell). Thus it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Yerramalli configuration scheme into Palle Venkata, Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer SSB scheme, The method can be implemented in SSB. The motivation of doing this is to perform measurement based on fixed configuration for the cell. Regarding claim 22, Palle Venkata discloses wherein receiving the cell information comprises receiving the cell information prior to the cell having a location proximate to the first network node (see para. 0076, proximate to geographical location). Regarding claim 23, Palle Venkata wherein the cell is associated with a mobile termination function (see para. 0070 mobile handover or terminating function). Regarding claim 24, Palle Venkata discloses wherein the mobile status cell information comprises an indication corresponding to a mobile backhaul configuration (see para. 0103 and 0106, backhaul interface for communication). Regarding claim 25, Palle Venkata, Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the mobile status cell information comprises a synchronization signal block measurement timing configuration. However, Yerramalli from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the mobile status cell information comprises at least one of a measurement timing parameter or a synchronization signal block measurement timing configuration (see para. 0099, 101 and 106, SMTC window). Thus it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Yerramalli configuration scheme into Palle Venkata, Ishii, Dahlman and Fischer SSB scheme, The method can be implemented in SSB. The motivation of doing this is to perform measurement based on fixed configuration for the cell. Regarding claim 26, Palle Venkata discloses wherein the mobile status cell information corresponds to a common mobile configuration associated with the cell and at least one additional cell (see para. 0035). Regarding claim 38, same rejection applies as to claim 20. Regarding claim 39, same rejection applies as to claim 21. Regarding claim 40, same rejection applies as to claim 22. Regarding claim 41, same rejection applies as to claim 23. Regarding claim 42, same rejection applies as to claim 24. Regarding claim 43, same rejection applies as to claim 25. Regarding claim 44, same rejection applies as to claim 26. Claim(s) 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata, Dahlman, Ishii and Fischer as applied to claim13 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2014/0370908 A1, hereinafter “Lee”). Regarding claim 52, Palle Venkata, Dahlman, Ishii and Fischer disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein direction information is indicated in the neighbor cell information list, and wherein the direction information indicates a direction corresponding to a resource. However, Lee from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein direction information is indicated in the neighbor cell information list, and wherein the direction information indicates a direction corresponding to a resource (see para. 0116 and 0119, radio resource usage configuration information with direction). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Lee resource information into Palle Venkata, Dahlman, Ishii and Fischer system information. The method can be implemented in a system information message. The motivation of ding this is to reduce cell interference. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD S ANWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5 EST. 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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. MOHAMMAD S. ANWAR Primary Examiner Art Unit 2463 /MOHAMMAD S ANWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 15, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2024
Interview Requested
Jan 06, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 21, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 14, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 11, 2025
Interview Requested
Apr 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 27, 2025
Interview Requested
Sep 04, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 04, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 22, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 26, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 26, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 24, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 24, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598021
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PERFORMING SOUNDING PROCEDURE IN WIRELESS LAN SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598045
INDICATION INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588024
TIMELINES FOR TIME DIVISION MULTIPLEXING MODEM ENVELOPE ENHANCEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581407
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF RESTRICTED TWT FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581408
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF ORTHOGONAL RADIO SHARING ACROSS MULTIPLE LINKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
85%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1131 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