Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/681,020

WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND NETWORK DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 25, 2022
Examiner
ORGAD, EDAN
Art Unit
2414
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
31%
Grant Probability
At Risk
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
30%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 31% of cases
31%
Career Allow Rate
17 granted / 55 resolved
-27.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
67
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 55 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Status Prosecution on the merits of this application is reopened on claims 1, 4-15 and 18. Claims 1, 4-15 and 18 are withdrawn from issue (see communications dated 2/2/2026. Claims 1, 4-15 and 18 are pending Claims 2, 3, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are cancelled. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 4-6, 11, 14, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Xu et al (US 2019/0116536). Xu discloses: A handover method between eNBs (source and target) that addresses: Forwarding PDCP data packets Communicating PDCP SN and HFN values Sending SN status transfer messages (possibly multiple) at different times Allowing the target eNB to determine the next PDCP SN and HFN for continued transmission Avoiding duplication/loss during enhanced handover Multiple embodiments where: First information (SN status transfer, PDCP SNs, HFNs, and data packets) is sent at one time Second information (updated SN/HFN, counts, or indicators) is sent later The target uses this to determine the PDCP SN for the next packet not associated with the earlier PDCP SNs HFNs are explicitly used for encryption/integrity Initial conclusion: Xu appears to disclose all major structural and functional elements of the independent claims, including the two-stage sending (first and second information), the PDCP SN/HFN content, and the logic for determining the next SN at the target. It also covers the device configurations. Regarding claims 1, 15 and 18, Xu teaches a wireless communication method, comprising: sending, by a source base station, first information to a target base station when a base station handover occurs in a terminal device (Step 304, Step 404, Step 504 – source eNB sends SN status transfer to target eNB during handover), wherein the first information comprises at least one first packet data convergence protocol sequence number (PDCP SN) and a first data packet group, wherein the first data packet group comprises at least one first data packet (0164-0167, 0197-0201 – SN status transfer includes PDCP SNs; forwarded data includes PDCP data packets (first data packet group)); wherein the first information further comprises at least one first hyper frame number (HFN), and the at least one first HFN is used for encryption and integrity protection of the at least one first data packet ([0177], [0300]-[0308] – SN status transfer includes HFN; HFN used in PDCP for encryption/integrity, and sending, by the source base station, second information to the target base station so that the target base station determines a second PDCP SN associated with a second data packet according to the second information (Step 306a, Step 408a, Step 508a – later SN status transfer or other message containing updated SN/HFN or counts; target uses it to determine next PDCP SN), wherein the second data packet is a first one data packet received by the target base station that is not associated with the first PDCP SN (0164-0167, 0300-0308 – description of identifying first packet not associated with earlier PDCP SNs and assigning new SN), wherein the first information and the second information are sent at different time points (clear two-stage sending: initial SN status transfer + later second SN status transfer or other info (0177 and 0300). Worth noting related paragraphs in Xu 0301, 0302, 0327 and 0423-0475 which provide additional support for enhanced handover, target receives and source sending SN status transfer and forwards packets at different steps. In addition, since Xu discusses HFN and PDCP SN (DL count) and given the functionality is known in LTE PDCP (prior to applicant’s invention) one would infer that encryption usage is inherent to PDCP count. Claim 15 is the source base station apparatus, essentially the apparatus implementation of claim 1 and claim 18 is a target base station apparatus which mirrors apparatus claim 1- see rejection above. Claims 2.-3. (Canceled) Regarding claim 4. Xu teaches sending, by the source base station, the second information to the target base station so that the target base station determines the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet according to the second information, comprises: in a case that the terminal device is not disconnected from the source base station, sending, by the source base station, the second information to the target base station, so that the target base station determines the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet according to the second information (Xu explicitly contemplates sending second status information while the UE remains connected to source (enhanced handover 0158, 0191, 0230, 0420-0424 and 0457-0459). Regarding claim 5, Xu teaches the second information comprises one of following information: an indication signaling, a maximum PDCP SN in the data packet associated with the first PDCP SN in the first data packet group, and identification information (Xu explicitly lists second SN status types: indication, counts, max SN, identification info/end marker. Xu expressly discloses each of the three listed types as possible contents of the second information (indication value, max PDCP SN/count, identification/end-marker- 0164-0169, 0175, 0219-0224, 0420-0424). Regarding claim 6, Xu teaches the maximum PDCP SN is a maximum PDCP SN of the at least one first PDCP SN corresponding to a maximum HFN of at least one first HFN (Xu explains the relationship between SN range and HFN rollover 0302 and 0439. Since Xu supports this correlation of max PDCP SN to max HFN, limitation is disclosed or would be directly derivable from Xu’s DL count/HFN and SN relationships, thereby inherent to Xu). Regarding claim 11, Xu teaches in a case that the second information is the maximum PDCP SN in the data packet associated with the first PDCP SN in the first data packet group, sending, by the source base station, the second information to the target base station so that the target base station determines the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet according to the second information, comprises: sending, by the source base station, the maximum PDCP SN of the data packet associated with the first PDCP SN in the first data packet group to the target base station, so that the target base station determines a sum of the maximum PDCP SN and a preset value as the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet (Xu disclosure location “wherein the target base station determines a sum of the maximum PDCP SN and a preset value as the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet.” Xu explicitly uses “sum of the maximum PDCP SN and a preset value” to derive next PDCP SN in some embodiments- see 0211, 0212 and 0300–0311). Regarding claim 14. Xu teaches in a case that the second information is the identification information, sending, by the source base station, the second information to the target base station so that the target base station determines the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet according to the second information, comprises: sending, by the source base station, the identification information to the target base station, so that the target base station determines a sum of a preset value and the PDCP SN associated with the last data packet before the identification information as the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet, wherein the identification information identifies that the source base station ends forwarding of the data packet in the first data packet group (Xu teaches end marker indicating completion of forwarding – 0300-0308, 0433 and 0446). 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. Claims 7-10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu. Regarding claim 7, Xu teaches that in a case that the second information is the indication signaling, sending, by the source base station, the second information to the target base station so that the target base station determines the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet according to the second information, comprises: sending, by the source base station, the indication signaling to the target base station, wherein the indication signaling comprises an indication value, so that the target base station determines the indication value as the second PDCP SN associated with the second data packet (Xu describes indication signaling in which an indication value is sent, target interprets that value as next PDCP SN – paragraphs 0285, 0300–0308 and 0439, further teaches about indication signaling and using its value as next SN, e.g., Method descriptions where target uses indication value to determine next PDCP SN - therefore expressly discloses sending an indication value that the target treats as the next PDCP SN). However while Xu discloses determining SN algorithmically, Xu is silent to determining SN via explicit signaling value. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to transmit the PDCP SN as a signaling value in the exchanged information instead of requiring the target base station to derive the SN solely through algorithm inference. Doing so would simplify the handover procedure and reduce computational complexity. Worth noting that such modification represents a predictable variation of Xu’s system and merely involves providing explicitly via signaling a value that Xu already required the target base station to determine. Regarding claim 8. Xu teaches the indication value is a sum of a preset value and a PDCP SN of a data packet in the first data packet group that is the last data packet associated with SN in the at least one first PDCP SN (Xu describes deriving next SN by adding a preset value to a PDCP SN or max SN (Examples: target determines “sum of maximum PDCP SN and a preset value” as next PDCP SN- paragraphs 0211–0212, 0300–0311 and 0285–0289. Xu explicitly discloses deriving next SN by adding a preset offset to a known PDCP SN (e.g., last SN or maximum SN). Therefore Xu discloses a next-SN computed as preset + last/maximum SN and is an inherent and recognizable computation). Regarding claim 9, Xu teaches the case that the first data packet group sent by the source base station to the target base station is not lost, not sending, by the source base station, a second HFN to the target base station (Xu- 0327 and 0435). Regarding claim 10, Xu teaches a case that the first data packet group sent by the source base station to the target base station is lost, sending, by the source base station, a second HFN to the target base station (Xu- 0301, 0327, 0435 and 0438). Regarding claim 12, Xu teaches a part of the data packets in the first data packet group are associated with SNs in the at least one first PDCP SN (Xu- 0016-0017, 0163-0169 and 0301). Regarding claim 13, Xu teaches the second data packet is a data packet sent from a core network device and/or a data packet in the first data packet group that is not associated with SN in the at least one first PDCP SN (Xu- 0162, 0293). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDAN ORGAD whose telephone number is (571)272-7884. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM. 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. 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. /EDAN ORGAD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 25, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 21, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 07, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 26, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 14, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598456
SYSTEM, METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR PROVIDING MOBILE DEVICE SUPPORT SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581357
Light mobile core for networks
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557021
EDGE COMPUTING ROUTER, AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556212
Multi-Band Equalizers
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12543021
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR HANDLING MULTICAST BROADCAST SERVICE
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
31%
Grant Probability
30%
With Interview (-0.8%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 55 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