Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/907,379

CELLULAR TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 26, 2022
Examiner
KWOH, JASPER C
Art Unit
2415
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
British Telecommunications Public Limited Company
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
131 granted / 209 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
241
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 209 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 . 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. Claim Objections Claims 3-4 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 3, it is unclear how an “identifier” can be a “neighbor” of the AP. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2021/0120454 (hereinafter Chennichetty). Regarding claims 1 and 6-8, Chennichetty discloses a method of operating a first Access Point (AP) a cellular telecommunications network, the cellular telecommunications network having a plurality of APs and a core network (FIG. 1; [0058]: details root AP 110 may facilitate communications between the root AP 110 and the satellite APs 111-116, and also may facilitate communications between the WLAN and other networks or systems… the root AP 110 may be connected via a wired connection 121 (such as through an Ethernet or PLC), or alternatively, via a wireless connection, or even a hybrid communication link, to a back-end network 120 such as, for example, a LAN, WAN, MAN, a communication service provider network, the Internet, or any combination thereof), the method comprising: receiving an inter-AP message in a first wireless communication from a second AP of the plurality of APs (FIG. 1; [0039][0061]: details other APs make automatic path or routing selection using a logical topology between each of the other APs and the root AP… sixth AP 116 is connected to the root AP 110 by intervening APs 114 and 115, and therefore may be classified as a 3-hop device of the network), the inter-AP message comprising a destination identifier ([0067]: details the APs 110-116 may classify downlink data (such as data to be transmitted to one or more of its associated STAs) based on its traffic identifier (TID) and a destination address (DA)… The destination address (DA) indicates to which of the stations STA1-STA4 the data is to be transmitted); identifying a third AP of the plurality of APs based on the destination identifier of the inter-AP message (FIG. 1; [0039][0061]: details other APs make automatic path or routing selection using a logical topology between each of the other APs and the root AP… sixth AP 116 is connected to the root AP 110 by intervening APs 114 and 115, and therefore may be classified as a 3-hop device of the network… The destination address (DA) indicates to which of the stations STA1-STA4 the data is to be transmitted); and sending the inter-AP message to the third AP in a second wireless communication via a wireless downstream connection (FIG. 1; [0039][0061]: details other APs make automatic path or routing selection using a logical topology between each of the other APs and the root AP… sixth AP 116 is connected to the root AP 110 by intervening APs 114 and 115, and therefore may be classified as a 3-hop device of the network), wherein the first AP is connected to a first subset of the plurality of APs via a wireless upstream connection towards the core network and is further connected to a second subset of the plurality of APs via a wireless downstream connection away from the core network (FIG. 1; [0061]: details Each of the satellite APs 111-116 may be or may include a MAP agent 130 that allows the satellite APs 111-116 to provide wireless services to a number of client devices (such as the stations STA1-STA4). The MAP agents 130 may also allow their corresponding satellite APs 111-116 to communicate with downstream satellite APs or with upstream satellite APs (or both). In some implementations, the satellite APs 111-116 may be used to extend the wireless coverage area of the root AP 110, for example, by operating as relay devices or range extender devices). Regarding claim 2, Chennichetty discloses wherein the third AP is a destination of the inter-AP message ([0039][0061]: details other APs make automatic path or routing selection using a logical topology between each of the other APs and the root AP… sixth AP 116 is connected to the root AP 110 by intervening APs 114 and 115, and therefore may be classified as a 3-hop device of the network). Regarding claim 3, Chennichetty discloses wherein the destination identifier of the inter-AP message is a first neighbor of the third AP (FIG. 1; [0061][0067]: details sixth AP 116 is connected to the root AP 110 by intervening APs 114 and 115, and therefore may be classified as a 3-hop device of the network… the APs 110-116 may classify downlink data (such as data to be transmitted to one or more of its associated STAs) based on its traffic identifier (TID) and a destination address (DA)… The destination address (DA) indicates to which of the stations STA1-STA4 the data is to be transmitted). Regarding claim 4, Chennichetty discloses, initially: discovering the third AP; identifying the first neighbor of the third AP; and recording an association between the third AP and the first neighbor of the third AP, wherein identifying the third AP based on the destination identifier of the inter-AP message utilizes the recorded association between the third AP and the first neighbor of the third AP ([0039][0064]: details local network which is capable of coordinating between two or more APs to manage a topology or aggregate wireless coverage area… mesh networks may be referred to as Self-Organizing Networks (SONs); MAP agent; SON controller… the APs 110-116 may classify downlink data (such as data to be transmitted to one or more of its associated STAs) based on its traffic identifier (TID) and a destination address (DA)… The destination address (DA) indicates to which of the stations STA1-STA4 the data is to be transmitted). Regarding claim 5, Chennichetty discloses detecting a termination of an inter-AP connection between the third AP and a second neighbor of the third AP; and responsive to the detecting, updating a recorded association between the third AP and the second neighbor of the third AP ([0039][0064]: details local network which is capable of coordinating between two or more APs to manage a topology or aggregate wireless coverage area… mesh networks may be referred to as Self-Organizing Networks (SONs); MAP agent; SON controller). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 1/8/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chennichetty. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific. 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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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. /JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 26, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 13, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 08, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592877
PACKET FLOW IN A CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON CACHED AND NON-CACHED CONFIGURATION INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574167
TRANSMITTING AND RECEIVING SIDELINK REFERENCE SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574158
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR FEEDING BACK HARQ-ACK IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557079
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR DETERMINING AND ALLOCATING RESOURCES, AND TERMINAL AND NETWORK DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12531779
AVAILABILITY-ENHANCING GATEWAYS FOR NETWORK TRAFFIC IN VIRTUALIZED COMPUTING ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+12.6%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 209 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