Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/757,142

UE BASED PAIR ID FOR REDUNDANT PDU SESSIONS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 09, 2022
Examiner
VAN ROIE, JUSTIN T
Art Unit
2469
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
4 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
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

§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 . 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 Amendment The examiner notes that the claim markings of claim 31 is not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(c). However, in an effort to support compact prosecution, the examiner is interpreting claim 31 lines 6-7 “receive, from a second network entity, a first protocol data unit (PDU) session request message;” as --receive, from a second network entity, a first protocol data unit (PDU) session request message;-- Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1-9, 11-14, 17, 19-20, 22-23, 25-26, 28, 31-34, 36, 39, and 62-64, the applicant argued, “…That is, the UE generates a first PDU session pair ID for the first PDU session establishment message to the first SMF and generates a different, second PDU session pair ID for the second PDU session establishment message to the second SMF…Kim does not disclose that the UE includes the first PDU session pair ID (which the Office alleges is associates the PDU sessions as redundant) of the first PDU session establishment message in the second PDU session establishment message…” on pages 10-13. In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the above argument. In ¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B Kim clearly teaches a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: PDU session ID is a value shared with PDU session pair ID which identify the PDU sessions as redundant; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45); and transmit a second PDU session establishment message and the pair ID (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: transmit redundant PDU session establishment message including PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45). The applicant’s citations of Kim describe establishing a new PDU session. When the UE establishes a new PDU session, it does indeed generate a new PDU Session ID. Then when establishing a redundant PDU session, the PDU Session ID of the first session is used as the PDU session pair ID. Kim, in at least ¶71 (and page 39 of the cited KR priority document) states “PDU session pair ID, which is identical to the identifier of the first PDU session”. Therefore, generating a new PDU session ID is different than generating a PDU session pair ID. The applicant erroneously equates each PDU session ID as a PDU session pair ID. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claim(s) 1-9, 11-14, 17, 19-20, 22-23, 25-26, 28, 31-34, 36, 39, and 62-64 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP S2-1900342 “URLLC KI-1 Solution 1 – Updates related to the URLLC support by the network” (hereinafter referred to as “3GPP”) in view of Kim et al. US 2021/0250788 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Kim”) on the basis of KR 10-2019-0123065. Note 3GPP was cited by the applicant in the IDSs received 9 July 2022 and 25 September 2024. As to claim 1, 3GPP teaches an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit a first protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment message (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-4: UE includes RSN in the PDU Session Establishment Request message for first PDU session being established); determine a pair identifier (ID) (page 4, lines 1-3: UE determines RSN for indicating the presence of redundant handling); and transmit a second PDU session establishment message and the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-4: UE includes RSN in the PDU Session Establishment Request message for the second PDU session being established). Although 3GPP teaches “An apparatus…pair identifier (ID); and transmit…the pair ID,” 3GPP does not explicitly disclose “a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant”. However, Kim teaches a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: PDU session ID is a value shared with PDU session pair ID which identify the PDU sessions as redundant; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45); and transmit a second PDU session establishment message and the pair ID (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: transmit redundant PDU session establishment message including PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP by including “a value of the pair identifier is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant” as taught by Kim because it provides 3GPP’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of improved handling of redundant PDU sessions handled via different SMFs (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 2, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the first PDU session establishment message includes the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 3, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to transmit the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to: transmit a message including the pair ID, wherein the message including the pair ID is separate from the first PDU session establishment message (page 4, lines 1-3 and 18-20 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-3: RSN included in second PDU session establishment message). As to claim 4, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to transmit the first PDU session establishment message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the first PDU session establishment message to a first network entity, and wherein the first PDU session establishment message is configured to cause the first network entity to send a PDU session request message to a second network entity (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 5, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 4. 3GPP further teaches wherein the PDU session request message includes the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 6, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Kim further teaches wherein the second PDU session establishment message includes the pair ID and is configured to establish the redundant PDU sessions for the first and second PDU session establishment messages (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: transmit second PDU session establishment request including the PDU session pair ID equal to the PDU session ID to establish the redundant PDU sessions). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP in view of Kim by including “wherein the second…establishment messages” as further taught by Kim for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 7, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to determine the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to generate or allocate the value of the pair ID based on a service associated with a PDU session corresponding to the first PDU session establishment message (page 2, lines 15-16, page 4, lines 1-3, and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 8, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to transmit the first PDU session establishment message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the first PDU session establishment message to a first network entity and wherein the first PDU session establishment message includes the pair ID, and wherein, to transmit the second PDU session establishment message, the at least one processor is configured to: transmit the second PDU session establishment message to a third network entity, wherein the second PDU session establishment message is configured to cause the third network entity to send a second PDU session request message to a second network entity (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 1-22; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 9, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 8. 3GPP further teaches wherein the second network entity comprise a radio access network (RAN); or the first and third network entities comprise Session Management Functions (SMFs) (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 1-22; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 11, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to determine the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to determine a PDU session ID from a prior PDU session as the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 12, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to determine the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to determine the pair ID from a services table based on a corresponding service of a PDU session associated with the first PDU session establishment message (page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 13, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to transmit the first PDU session establishment message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the first PDU session establishment message to a first network entity and wherein the first PDU session establishment message excludes the pair ID and is transmitted prior to determination of the pair ID, and wherein, to transmit the second PDU session establishment message, the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, after the determination of the pair ID, the second PDU session establishment message to a third network entity, wherein the second PDU session establishment message is configured to cause the third network entity to send a second PDU session request message to a second network entity (page 4, lines 1-7 and page 5, lines 7-11; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 14, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 13. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, after transmission of the first PDU session establishment message a third PDU session establishment message to a fourth network entity, wherein the third PDU session establishment message includes the pair ID, and wherein the third PDU session establishment message is configured to cause the fourth network entity to send a third PDU session request message to the second network entity (page 4, lines 1-7 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 17, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to assign the pair ID to a particular service, wherein, to assign the pair ID to the particular service, the at least one processor is configured to edit a service table to correlate the pair ID with the particular service (page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 19, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 17. 3GPP further teaches wherein the services table is a URLLC service table (page 1, page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 20, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform a PDU session modification operation, wherein the PDU session modification operation includes transmitting a modification request to a service providing device including remove information corresponding to the pair ID (page 6, lines 15-19). As to claim 22, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive first data via a first PDU session established by the first PDU session establishment message; and receive second data via a second PDU session, the second data the same as the first data (page 3, lines 1-9 and page 5, lines 7-9, 12-14, and 24-26; figures 6.1.1-2 and 6.1.1-4). Kim further teaches a second PDU session established by the second PDU session establishment message (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: second PDU session establishment request including the PDU session pair ID equal to the PDU session ID to establish the redundant PDU sessions). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP in view of Kim by including “established by the second PDU session establishment message” as further taught by Kim for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 23, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 22. 3GPP further teaches wherein: to receive the first data, the at least one processor is configured to receive the first data from a particular servicing device via a first base station; and to receive the second data, the at least one processor is configured to receive the second data from the particular servicing device via a second base station (page 3, lines 1-9, page 4, lines 21-22, and page 5, lines 1-26; figures 6.1.1-2 and 6.1.1-4). As to claim 25, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured with a redundancy handling function (RHF) that is configured to generate or determine the pair ID (page 2, lines 26-35, page 4, lines 1-3, and page 5, lines 7-9 and 24-26; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 26, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to receive an apparatus policy from a network entity, and wherein, to determine the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to cause generation or determination of the pair ID based on the apparatus policy (page 2, lines 26-35, page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9 and 24-26, and page 6, lines 20-21; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 28, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: determine a first service associated with a first PDU session determine a second service associated with a second PDU session; compare the first service to the second service; and determine to generate a redundant PDU session based on the comparison (page 2, lines 15-16, page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9 and 24-26, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 31, 3GPP teaches a first network entity for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive, from a second network entity, a first protocol data unit (PDU) session request message (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4: RAN receives PDU Session Establishment Request message from SMF 1); receive, from a third network entity, a second PDU session request message including a pair identifier (ID) (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4: RAN receives PDU Session Establishment Request message including RSN from SMF 2); and associate a PDU session indicated by the PDU session request message with the pair ID (page 5, lines 12-14 and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4: determine PDU Session establishment for redundant PDU session using the RSN). Although 3GPP teaches “A first network entity…the pair ID,” 3GPP does not explicitly disclose “a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant”. However, Kim teaches receive, from a third network entity, a second PDU session request message including a pair identifier (ID) (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: receive redundant PDU request message including PDU pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45); and associate, a PDU session indicated by the first PDU session request message with the pair ID, wherein a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: PDU session ID is a value shared with PDU session pair ID which identify the PDU sessions as redundant; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP by including “a value of the pair ID is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate PDU sessions together as redundant” as taught by Kim because it provides 3GPP’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of improved handling of redundant PDU sessions handled via different SMFs (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 32, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the first network entity of claim 31. 3GPP further teaches wherein the pair ID comprises an apparatus-determined pair ID and is included in a N2 session management (SM) container of the second PDU session request message, and wherein the second PDU session request message is responsive to a second PDU session establishment message which included the apparatus-determined pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 33, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the first network entity of claim 32. 3GPP further teaches wherein, to associate the PDU session with the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to modify one or more entries of a PDU table to indicate the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-9, and page 5, line 34 – page 6, line 8; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 34, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the first network entity of claim 31. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive the second PDU session request message responsive to a second PDU session establishment message; and associate a second PDU session indicated by the second PDU session request message with the pair ID, wherein, to associate the second PDU session with the pair ID, the at least one processor is configured to associate the PDU session and the second PDU session as the redundant PDU sessions (page 4, lines 1-3 and 18-20 and page 5, lines 7-9; figure 6.1.1-3). As to claim 36, 3GPP teaches a first network entity for wireless communication comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive from an apparatus, a second protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment message and a pair identifier (ID); and transmit a PDU session request message for a second PDU session responsive to the second PDU session establishment message, the PDU session request message including the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3 and page 5, lines 7-22; figure 6.1.1-4: MgNB receives PDU Session Establishment Request message including RSN from UE and forwards it to SMF). Although 3GPP teaches “A first network entity…the pair ID,” 3GPP does not explicitly disclose “a value of the pair identifier is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate the second PDU session and a prior, first PDU session together as redundant”. However, Kim teaches a value of the pair identifier is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate the second PDU session and a prior, first PDU session together as redundant (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B: second PDU session request includes PDU pair ID which is identical to the fist PDU session ID and associates PDU sessions as redundant; see at least page 39 of KR priority document “…the PDU session pair ID which is identical to the first PDU session ID” – see also pages 32-45). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP by including “a value of the pair identifier is an indication shared by redundant PDU sessions and configured to associate the second PDU session and a prior, first PDU session together as redundant” as taught by Kim because it provides 3GPP’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of improved handling of redundant PDU sessions handled via different SMFs (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 39, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the first network entity of claim 36. 3GPP further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive from the apparatus, a PDU session modification request message including remove information corresponding to the pair ID; and transmit to a second network entity, a PDU session modification message indicating removal of the pair ID (page 4, lines 1-3, page 5, lines 7-22, and page 6, lines 15-19; figure 6.1.1-4). As to claim 62, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Kim further teaches wherein the pair ID comprises an identifier of a PDU session (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP in view of Kim by including “wherein the pair ID comprises an identifier of a PDU session” as further taught by Kim for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 63, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 62. Kim further teaches wherein the pair ID further identifies a service associated with the PDU session (¶¶71, 157-159-162, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP in view of Kim by including “wherein the pair ID further identifies a service associated with the PDU session” as further taught by Kim for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). As to claim 64, 3GPP in view of Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Kim further teaches wherein the pair ID is a PDU session ID that identifies a first PDU session associated with the first PDU session establishment message (¶¶71, 157-159, 282, 286, and 291; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). 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 apparatus described in 3GPP in view of Kim by including “wherein the pair ID is a PDU session ID that identifies a first PDU session associated with the first PDU session establishment message” as further taught by Kim for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Kim, ¶286; figures 6A, 8A, and 8B). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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

Jun 09, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 09, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 11, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 30, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 04, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 08, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 25, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 26, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

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

5-6
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