Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/917,791

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR UPLINK RESOURCE ALLOCATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 07, 2022
Examiner
CHOWDHURY, HARUN UR R
Art Unit
2473
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Lenovo (Beijing) Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
439 granted / 581 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
636
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 581 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. 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 2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/10/2025 has been entered. Status of Claims 3. Claims 1-4, 13, 33-42, 45, 48-51 are pending wherein claims 1, 33, 34, and 50 are in independent form. 4. Claims 1-4, 13, and 33-34 have been amended. 5. Claims 5-12, 14-32, 43-44, and 46-47 have been canceled. Claims 48-51 have been added newly. 6. Duplicate claims warning has been withdrawn. Response to Arguments 7. Applicant's arguments filed on 10/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below. 8. On page 10 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Accordingly, Fu's description that a downlink LBT sub-band and an uplink LBT sub-band are “in the same frequency band" merely indicates that both sub-bands fall within the same overall frequency allocation of the BWP, not that they occupy the same frequencies, let alone share a same center frequency point. Fu does not mention any specific locations of the downlink LBT sub-band 1 or the uplink LBТ sub-band 1 within that "same frequency band," nor does Fu show or require that the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 1 share a same center frequency point.” In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because: Fu discloses to select an uplink LBT sub-band that is located in the same frequency band of the downlink LBT sub-band used to send PDCCH (Par 0077). Downlink LBT sub-band and uplink LBT sub-band located in the same frequency band clearly indicate that they occupy the same frequency position. Paragraph [0104] states, “If a downlink LBT sub-band and an uplink LBT sub-band arc in the same frequency band, that is, through time division multiplexing, as shown in FIG. 4, the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 1 are in the same frequency band”. Therefore, Fu clearly discloses that the downlink LBT sub-band and the uplink LBT sub-band occupy the same frequency location but occurs in different time domain position. Moreover, Fu discloses (in view of Fig. 2), “For example, the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 1 are in the same frequency band, and the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 2 are not in the same frequency band” (Par 0090, Par 0096). Therefore, the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 1 occupy the same frequency domain location, and downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 2 do not occupy the same frequency domain location. Paragraph [0142] states “It is assumed that downlink LBT sub-band 1 and uplink LBT sub-band 1 belong to one pair, with the same frequency domain location, downlink LBT sub-band 2 and uplink LBT sub-band 2 belong to one pair, with the same frequency domain location, downlink LBT sub-band 3 and uplink LBT sub-band 3 belong to one pair, with the same frequency domain location, and downlink LBT sub-band 4 and uplink LBT sub-band 4 belong to one pair, with the same frequency domain location, that is to say, downlink LBT sub-band 1 corresponds to uplink LBT sub-band 1, downlink LBT sub-band 2 corresponds to uplink LBT sub-band 2, downlink LBT sub-band 3 corresponds to uplink LBT sub-band 3, and downlink LBT sub-band 4 corresponds to uplink LBT sub-band 4”. Therefore, the downlink LBT sub-band and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band occupy the same frequency domain location. As the downlink LBT sub-band (i.e., Downlink LBT sub-band 1) and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band (i.e., uplink LBT sub-band 1) occupy the same frequency range/bandwidth, the center frequency point is same in both the Downlink LBT sub-band and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band. 9. On page 11 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Thus, Fu's generalized description of downlink and uplink sub-bands being "in the same frequency band" is not equivalent to, and cannot be relied upon to teach or suggest, the claimed feature of "wherein the RB set has a first central frequency point; selecting at least one RB set of a plurality of RB sets based at least in part on the at least one RB set having a second central frequency point equal to the first central frequency point." In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because: Fu discloses to select an uplink sub-band in the same frequency band/location of the downlink sub-band used to transmit the DCI/PDCCH (Par 0077, Par 0081, Par 0090, Par 0096, Par 0146-0148, Par 0154, Par 0169-0170)). Paragraph [0090] states, “LBT is preferentially performed on the PUCCH resources in the uplink LBT sub-band which are in the same frequency band as the downlink LBT sub-band where the PDCCH containing the PRI is located. For example, the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 1 are in the same frequency band, and the downlink LBT sub-band 1 and the uplink LBT sub-band 2 are not in the same frequency band. The PRI contained in the PDCCH in the downlink LBT sub-band 1 indicates two PUCCH resources, which arc PUCCH-1 and PUCCH-2, wherein PUCCH-1 is located in the uplink LBT sub-band 1, and PUCCH-2 is located in the uplink LBT sub-band 2. The UE preferentially performs LBT on the uplink LBT sub-band 1 containing PUCCH-1, and then performs LBT on the uplink LBT sub-band 2 containing PUCCH-2. Because the PDCCH is transmitted in the downlink LBT sub-band 1, the LBT result of the downlink LBT sub-band 1 is idle, and LBT is performed preferentially in the uplink LBT sub-band 1 in the same frequency band as the downlink LBT sub-band 1, the probability of the LBT result being idle is larger”. When the DCI is sent over the downlink LBT sub-band 1, the UE preferably selects the uplink LBT sub-band 1 located in the same frequency band as the downlink LBT sub-band 1. As the downlink LBT sub-band (i.e., Downlink LBT sub-band 1) and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band (i.e., uplink LBT sub-band 1) occupy the same frequency range/bandwidth, the center frequency point is same in both the Downlink LBT sub-band and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 10. 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. 11. Claims 1-4, 13, 33-42, 45, 48-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al (US 20220247543 A1, hereinafter referred to as FU) in view of Yang et al (US 20220287035, hereinafter referred to as Yang). Re claim 1, Fu teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1, Fig. 5, Fig. 11), comprising: (i) receiving a downlink control information (DCI) (DCI scheduling PUCCH/PUSCH) in a resource block (RB) set (DL LBT sub-band used to send DCI) in a downlink bandwidth part (BWP) (DL LBT sub-bands are included in a BWP), the DCI scheduling an uplink transmission in an uplink BWP (uplink LBT sub-bands are included in a BWP), wherein the RB set has a first central frequency point (center frequency of the DL LBT sub-band 1/ DL LBT sub-band used to transmit PDCCH) (Fig. 1-8, Par 0071-0081, Par 0088-0096, Par 0102-0104, Par 0106-0115, Par 0123-0128, Par 0134-0142, Par 0146-0147, Par 0158-0165); (ii) selecting at least one RB set of a plurality of RB sets (selecting an uplink LBT sub-band corresponding to the DL LBT sub-band used to send DCI/selecting plink LBT sub-band 1 corresponding to the DL LBT sub-band 1) based at least in part on the at least one RB set having a second central frequency point equal to the first central frequency point (As the downlink LBT sub-band (i.e., Downlink LBT sub-band 1) and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band (i.e., uplink LBT sub-band 1) occupy the same frequency range/bandwidth, the center frequency point is same in both the Downlink LBT sub-band and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band) (Fig. 2-8, Par 0075-0077, Par 0090-0092, Par 0096, Par 0104, Par 0126-0130, Par 0141-0142, Par 0145-0147, Par 0154, Par 0158-0161, Par 0169-0170), (iii) transmitting the uplink transmission on the at least one resource block (RB) RB set (transmitting PUCCH/PUSCH using an idle UL LBT subband) of the plurality of RB sets (UL LBT sub-bands 1-3) in response to a channel access procedure being successful for the at least one RB set (determining an idle UL LBT subband), (Fig. 1-8, Par 0071-0081, Par 0088-0096, Par 0102-0104, Par 0106-0115, Par 0123-0128, Par 0134-0142, Par 0146-0147, Par 0158-0165), Fu does not explicitly disclose that (iv) each of the plurality of RB sets including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP, (v) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets. Re components (iv)-(v), Yang teaches that (iv) each of the plurality of RB sets (plurality of LBT-SB) including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP (each of the LBT-SB/SB-RB includes a plurality of contiguous RBs) (Fig. 8-18, Par 0078, Par 0086-0088, Par 0094-0100, Par 0105-0108, Par 0112, Par 0114-0116, Par 0129-0134, Par 0136-0140), (v) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets (guard band is provided between two consecutive/adjacent LBT-SB/SB-RB) (Fig. 8-18, Par 0078, Par 0086-0088, Par 0094-0100, Par 0105-0108, Par 0112, Par 0114-0116, Par 0129-0134, Par 0136-0140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that (iv) each of the plurality of RB sets including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP, (v) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Claim 33 recites a user equipment performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. Fu further teaches that the user equipment comprises at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 17-18, Par 0299-0304). Re claims 2, 40, 51, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the DCI is DCI format 0_0. Yang teaches that the DCI is DCI format 0_0 (Fig. 6, Par 0066-0067). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that the DCI is DCI format 0_0 as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claims 3, 35, 41, Fu does not explicitly disclose that a number of RB sets in the plurality of RB sets is a greatest integer less than or equal to a result of dividing a bandwidth of the uplink BWP by a bandwidth of a subband. Yang teaches that a number of RB sets (number of LBT-SB/SB-RB in a BWP) in the plurality of RB sets is a greatest integer less than or equal to a result of dividing a bandwidth of the uplink BWP a bandwidth of a subband (the uplink BWP is the sum of the bandwidth of each LBT-SB/SB-RB, Fig. 9-13, Fig. 15-16) (Par 0078, Par 0116, Par 0120-0130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that a number of RB sets in the plurality of RB sets is a greatest integer less than or equal to a result of dividing a bandwidth of the uplink BWP by a bandwidth of a subband as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claims 4, 42, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit, and the frequency hopping flag indicates at least one of the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission, one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets, or a number of RB sets from the two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets. Yang teaches that DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit (RB interlace index), and the frequency hopping flag indicates at least one of the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission (RB interlace index defined on an LBT-SB basis), one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets (common RB interlace index in a plurality of LBT-SB), or a number of RB sets from the two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets (RB interlace index in each of the plurality of LBT-SBs) (Fig. 10-13, Fig. 15-16, Par 0086-0092, Par 0094-0100, Par 0130-0140, Par 0144-0145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that the DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit, and the frequency hopping flag indicates at least one of the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission, one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets, or a number of RB sets from the two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claims 13, 45, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the at least one RB set of the plurality of RB sets has at least one of a lowest RB set index or a lowest central frequency point, or a highest RB set index or a highest central frequency point. Yang teaches that the at least one RB set of the plurality of RB sets has at least one of a lowest RB set index or a lowest central frequency point, or a highest RB set index or a highest central frequency point (when DCI/resource allocation includes two LBT-SB/SB-RB and successful LBT process definitely includes the highest/lowest LBT-SB index. When LBT process is successful for SB #0, then the selected RB set is the lowest RB set/LBT-SB index. When LBT process is successful for SB #3, then the selected RB set is the highest RB set/LBT-SB index. Selecting lowest or highest RB index based on the successful LBT process) (Fig. 11-16, Par 0072, Par 0093-0100, Par 0105-0109, Par 0130-0140, Par 0144-0145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that the at least one RB set of the plurality of RB sets has at least one of a lowest RB set index or a lowest central frequency point, or a highest RB set index or a highest central frequency point, as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claim 34, Fu teaches a base station for wireless communication (Par 0010-0015, Par 0088, Par 0092), comprising: (i) at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 24, Par 0307-0314) and operable to cause the base station to: (ii) transmit a downlink control information (DCI) (DCI scheduling PUCCH/PUSCH) in a resource block (RB) set (DL LBT sub-band used to send DCI) in a downlink bandwidth part (BWP) (DL LBT sub-bands are included in a BWP), the DCI scheduling an uplink transmission in an uplink BWP (uplink LBT sub-bands are included in a BWP), wherein the RB set has a first central frequency point (center frequency of the DL LBT sub-band 1/ DL LBT sub-band used to transmit PDCCH) (Fig. 1-8, Par 0071-0081, Par 0088-0096, Par 0102-0104, Par 0106-0115, Par 0123-0128, Par 0134-0142, Par 0146-0147, Par 0158-0165); (iii) select at least one RB set of a plurality of RB sets (selecting an uplink LBT sub-band corresponding to the DL LBT sub-band used to send DCI/selecting plink LBT sub-band 1 corresponding to the DL LBT sub-band 1) based at least in part on the at least one RB set having a second central frequency point equal to the first central frequency point (As the downlink LBT sub-band (i.e., Downlink LBT sub-band 1) and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band (i.e., uplink LBT sub-band 1) occupy the same frequency range/bandwidth, the center frequency point is same in both the Downlink LBT sub-band and the corresponding uplink LBT sub-band) (Fig. 2-8, Par 0075-0077, Par 0090-0092, Par 0096, Par 0104, Par 0126-0130, Par 0141-0142, Par 0145-0147, Par 0154, Par 0158-0161, Par 0169-0170), (iv) receive the uplink transmission on the at least one resource block (RB) RB set (transmitting PUCCH/PUSCH using an idle UL LBT subband) of the plurality of RB sets (UL LBT sub-bands 1-3) in response to a channel access procedure being successful for the at least one RB set (determining an idle UL LBT subband), (Fig. 1-8, Par 0071-0081, Par 0088-0096, Par 0102-0104, Par 0106-0115, Par 0123-0128, Par 0134-0142, Par 0146-0147, Par 0158-0165); Fu does not explicitly disclose that (v) each of the plurality of RB sets including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP, (vi) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets. Re components (v)-(vi), Yang teaches that (v) each of the plurality of RB sets (plurality of LBT-SB) including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP (each of the LBT-SB/SB-RB includes a plurality of contiguous RBs) (Fig. 8-18, Par 0078, Par 0086-0088, Par 0094-0100, Par 0105-0108, Par 0112, Par 0114-0116, Par 0129-0134, Par 0136-0140), (vi) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets (guard band is provided between two consecutive/adjacent LBT-SB/SB-RB) (Fig. 8-18, Par 0078, Par 0086-0088, Par 0094-0100, Par 0105-0108, Par 0112, Par 0114-0116, Par 0129-0134, Par 0136-0140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the steps that (v) each of the plurality of RB sets including a plurality of contiguous RBs in the uplink BWP, (vi) a guard band is configured between two adjacent RB sets of the plurality of RB sets as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Claim 50 recites a method performing the functions recited in claim 34 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 34. Re claim 36, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit, and the frequency hopping flag indicates the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission. Yang teaches that DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit (RB interlace index), and the frequency hopping flag indicates the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission (RB interlace index defined on an LBT-SB basis) (Fig. 10-13, Fig. 15-16, Par 0086-0092, Par 0094-0100, Par 0130-0140, Par 0144-0145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the step that the DCI includes a frequency hopping flag having at least one bit, and the frequency hopping flag indicates the at least one RB set for the uplink transmission, as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claim 37, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the frequency hopping flag indicates one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets. Yang teaches that the frequency hopping flag indicates one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets (RB interlace index defined on an LBT-SB basis) (Fig. 10-13, Fig. 15-16, Par 0086-0092, Par 0094-0100, Par 0130-0140, Par 0144-0145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the step that the frequency hopping flag indicates one of two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets, as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claim 38, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the frequency hopping flag indicates a number of RB sets from two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets. Yang teaches that the frequency hopping flag indicates a number of RB sets from two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets (RB interlace index in each of the plurality of LBT-SBs) (Fig. 10-13, Fig. 15-16, Par 0086-0092, Par 0094-0100, Par 0130-0140, Par 0144-0145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the step that the frequency hopping flag indicates a number of RB sets from two predefined RB sets in the plurality of RB sets, as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claim 39, Fu does not explicitly disclose that the frequency hopping flag indicates that the at least one RB set includes RB sets of the plurality of RB sets having odd RB set indices or even RB set indices. Yang teaches that the frequency hopping flag indicates that the at least one RB set includes RB sets of the plurality of RB sets having odd RB set indices or even RB set indices (RB interlace index indicated for SB-#0 and SB#2) (Fig. 15, Par 0141-0142, Par 0144). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Fu by including the step that the frequency hopping flag indicates that the at least one RB set includes RB sets of the plurality of RB sets having odd RB set indices or even RB set indices, as taught by Yang for the purpose of “efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission and reception process”, as taught by Yang (Par 0003). Re claims 48, 49, Fu teaches that the RB set has a first RB set index (DL LBT sub-band 1); the at least one RB set has a second RB index (UL LBT sub-band 1); and the at least one RB set is selected based at least in part on the second RB set index being equal to the first RB set index (UL LBT sub-band 1 is selected based on the DL LBT sub-band 1 used to transmit DCI) (Par 0075-0077, Par 0090-0092, Par 0096, Par 0104, Par 0126-0130, Par 0141-0142, Par 0145-0147, Par 0154, Par 0158-0161, Par 0169-0170). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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. /HARUN CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 07, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 02, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 10, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 10, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 10, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598570
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE FOR CORRECTING OFFSET BETWEEN BASE STATION AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587900
ERROR HANDLING IN DUAL ACTIVE LINK HANDOVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581531
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR LISTEN-BEFORE-TALK IN A FREQUENCY BAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12556316
CONFIGURABLE MINI-SLOT RETRANSMISSIONS IN SIDELINK COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549428
DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND RELATED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
99%
With Interview (+26.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 581 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