Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/887,405

SEMI-PERSISTENT CONFIGURATIONS ENHANCEMENTS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Aug 12, 2022
Examiner
VU, HOANG-CHUONG Q
Art Unit
2476
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
482 granted / 636 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
655
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 636 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Claims 1, 2, 4-12, and 14-20 are currently pending. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1, 2, 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 has been amended to recites the limitation “wherein the second SPS configuration is received in response to a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic”; however, this limitation does not appear to have support from the originally filed specification. Applicant indicated that this feature is supported with referencing to Figs. 9-11 and associated detailed description therewith. However, the description does not appear to explicitly describe a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic and receiving the second SPS configuration in response to the detection. Dependent claims 2, 4-10 are rejected based on the virtue of their dependency on the rejected base claim 1. 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, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20240349266 A1) in view of Babaei (US 20220094484 A1) and Wang et al. (US 20240333656 A1). Regarding claim 1, Zhang et al. disclose a method for receiving traffic in a wireless network, the method comprising: receiving, by a wireless device in the wireless network, a Semi-Persistent Scheduling (SPS) configuration for one or more occasions in a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) of the wireless network for traffic for the wireless device (paragraph [0054]; receiving a SPS configuration via RRC signaling for multiple SPS PDSCH occasions per SPS periodicity and corresponding slots based on pattern of SPS PDSCH occasions); and receiving, by the wireless device, the traffic in the one or more occasions (paragraph [0004]; receiving data transmission on the set of SPS PDSCH occasions). However, Zhang et al. may not explicitly suggest receiving, by the wireless device, a second SPS configuration for matching the traffic by aligning at least one of an actual SPS slot or an SPS occasion with a target periodicity of the traffic. Babaei from the same or similar field of endeavor suggests receiving, by the wireless device, a SPS configuration for matching the traffic by aligning at least one of an actual SPS slot or an SPS occasion with a target periodicity of the traffic (paragraph [0230]; multiple SPS configurations and/or shorter SPS periodicity values may be used to align between the actual transmission and available SPS occasions (target periodicity)). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Zhang et al.’s method/system the step of receiving, by the wireless device, a SPS configuration for matching the traffic by aligning at least one of an actual SPS slot or an SPS occasion with a target periodicity of the traffic as suggested by Babaei to minimize the alignment delay to the actual transmission (paragraph [0230]). However, Zhang et al. and Babaei may not explicitly suggest wherein the second SPS configuration is received in response to a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic. Wang et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest wherein the second SPS configuration is received in response to a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic (paragraphs [0060-0063] and fig. 3; determining part of packets of the XR traffic flow are late (change in periodicity of the traffic flow), the gNB configures the UE by allocating a second resources (SPS occasions) by transmitting a message indicating the second resources for the XR traffic flow by SPS). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Zhang et al. and Babaei’s method/system where a second SPS configuration is received in response to a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic as suggested by Wang et al. The motivation to provide SPS enhancement would have been to decrease unnecessary resource waste of packet transmission and save UE power consumption for receiving the traffic flow (paragraph [0058]). Regarding claim 2, Zhang et al. further suggest wherein the SPS configuration comprises one or more occasions in at least one time slot in a SPS period (paragraph [0054]; receiving a SPS configuration via RRC signaling for multiple SPS PDSCH occasions per SPS periodicity and corresponding slots based on pattern of SPS PDSCH occasions). Regarding claim 4, Zhang et al. further suggest wherein the traffic comprises one or more packets of traffic in which each packet comprises a same packet size, or a packet size that is different from another packet (paragraphs [0038-0039]; for XR traffic, which may have large packet size. For Rel-15/Rel-16 SPS/CG with small data packet size, it is not necessary to support CBG based transmission, but for large periodic XR data packet size, it is beneficial to support CBG based transmission for SPS/CG to improve the spectrum efficiency). Regarding claim 5, Zhang et al. further suggest wherein the SPS configuration comprises a plurality of different configuration states, the method further comprising receiving, by the wireless device, a Downlink Control Information (DCI) message that indicates to the wireless device which SPS configuration state of the plurality of different configuration states to use to receive the traffic (paragraph [0054]; control information may indicate a plurality of patterns of the set of SPS PDSCH occasions. The terminal device may receive the DCI which comprises an indication of a target pattern. The terminal device may determine the target pattern from the plurality of patterns based on the indication. For example, several patterns for multiple SPS PDSCH occasions per SPS periodicity for a SPS configuration can be configured by RRC signaling, one of the patterns can be indicated for UE by activation DCI. Then terminal device can determine the number of SPS PDSCH occasions for multi-TB transmissions per SPS periodicity and the corresponding slots/mini-slots based on the pattern). Regarding claim 7, Zhang et al. further suggest wherein the SPS configuration comprises a configuration for each slot of a plurality of slots of a SPS period, the method further comprising receiving, by the wireless device, a Downlink Control Information (DCI) message that indicates one or more occasions in at least one slot for the wireless device to receive traffic (paragraph [0054]; The terminal device may determine the target pattern from the plurality of patterns based on the indication (DCI). For example, several patterns for multiple SPS PDSCH occasions per SPS periodicity for a SPS configuration can be configured by RRC signaling, one of the patterns can be indicated for UE by activation DCI). Regarding claim 9, Zhang et al. further suggest wherein the DCI message comprises a field of bits in which a position of a bit in the field of bits corresponds to a slot of the plurality of slots of the SPS period, and wherein a predetermined value of a bit in the field of bits indicates whether the wireless device is to use the one or more occasions in the slot corresponding to the position of the bit in the field of bits (paragraph [0094]; control information can be transmitted in downlink control information (DCI). A new field can be introduced or reinterpret the unused field in the activation DCI to explicitly indicate the number of CBG per TB for a SPS configuration. Alternatively, the DCI may implicitly indicate the number of CBG per TB for SPS/CG by the CBGTI field in the activation DCI, for example, when the bit width of CBGTI field=4, the value=1100, then the No. of CBG per TB for SPS equals to the number of 1 values in the field, i.e., is 2). Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20240349266 A1) in view of Babaei (US 20220094484 A1) and Wang et al. (US 20240333656 A1), and further in view of Liu et al. (US 20220272738 A1). Regarding claim 6, Zhang et al., Babaei, and Zhang et al. disclose all the subject matter of the claimed invention as recited in claim 5 above without explicitly suggest wherein the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic. However, Liu et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest wherein the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic (paragraph [0116] [0118]; in order to meet (within) a given delay threshold for the TB, the gNB may take at least one of below actions to ensure the UE to finish transmissions of the associated HARQ process within a maximum time period, which may be configured by the gNB: transmit DCI). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Zhang et al., Babaei, and Zhang et al.’s method/system where the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic as suggested by Liu et al. to improve data transmission reliability and latency (paragraphs [0123] [0154]). Regarding claim 8, Zhang et al., Babaei, and Zhang et al. disclose all the subject matter of the claimed invention as recited in claim 7 above without explicitly suggest wherein the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic. However, Liu et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest wherein the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic (paragraph [0116] [0118]; in order to meet (within) a given delay threshold for the TB, the gNB may take at least one of below actions to ensure the UE to finish transmissions of the associated HARQ process within a maximum time period, which may be configured by the gNB: transmit DCI). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Zhang et al., Babaei, and Zhang et al.’s method/system where the wireless device receives the DCI message a predetermined period of time prior to receiving the traffic that is within a delay limit of the traffic as suggested by Liu et al. to improve data transmission reliability and latency (paragraphs [0123] [0154]). Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20240349266 A1) in view of Babaei (US 20220094484 A1) and Wang et al. (US 20240333656 A1), and further in view of Awoniyi-Oteri et al. (US 20210377986 A1). Regarding claim 10, Zhang et al. further disclose wherein the SPS configuration comprises a configuration for at least one slot of a plurality of slots of a SPS period (paragraph [0054]; receiving a SPS configuration via RRC signaling for multiple SPS PDSCH occasions per SPS periodicity and corresponding slots based on pattern of SPS PDSCH occasions) without explicitly suggest wherein at least one Downlink Control Information (DCI) message for the wireless device is multiplexed with the SPS configuration. However, Awoniyi-Oteri et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest wherein at least one Downlink Control Information (DCI) message for the wireless device is multiplexed with the SPS configuration (paragraph [0075] and fig. 9; DCI information (on a SPS occasion) can be multiplexed with SPS config 1 and/or 2 shown in fig. 9). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Zhang et al., Babaei, and Zhang et al.’s method/system where at least one Downlink Control Information (DCI) message for the wireless device is multiplexed with the SPS configuration as suggested by Awoniyi-Oteri et al. to improve reliability (paragraph [0087]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11, 12, and 14-17 are allowed. Response to Arguments/Remarks Applicant’s arguments/remarks filed 11/03/2025 with respect to claim(s) 1 regarding the limitation “wherein the second SPS configuration is received in response to a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic”, Applicant submits that this feature is supported with referencing to Figs. 9-11 and associated detailed description therewith. However, the description does not appear to explicitly describe a detection of a change in the target periodicity of the traffic and receiving the second SPS configuration in response to the detection. Thus the claim has been rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Applicant’s arguments/remarks with regards to Zhang and Babaei have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOANG-CHUONG Q VU whose telephone number is (571)270-3945. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30-5:30 PM 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, AYAZ SHEIKH can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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. HOANG-CHUONG Q. VU Primary Examiner Art Unit 2476 /HOANG-CHUONG Q VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 12, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 06, 2025
Interview Requested
May 14, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 14, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 19, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 29, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598614
NR CGI INDICATION FOR CELLS WITHOUT SIB 1
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593240
DICTIONARY-BASED AI COMPONENTS IN WIRELESS SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581560
TERMINAL, RADIO COMMUNICATION METHOD, BASE STATION, AND SYSTEM FOR APPLYING TCI STATE TO CHANNEL AND REFERENCE SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557118
Multiple Data Scheduling
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12538309
Downlink Transmission Method and Communication Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+9.1%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 636 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