Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/006,944

TIME AND CODE DOMAIN COVERAGE ENHANCEMENTS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 26, 2023
Examiner
OVEISSI, MANSOUR
Art Unit
2415
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
741 granted / 893 resolved
+25.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
935
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 893 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 . Claims 1-20 have been cancelled. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered. Status of Claims 3. This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 12/16/2025. Claims 21 and through 40 are presently pending and are presented for examination. 4. 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 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 Rejections – 35 USC § 103 5. 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 21-25, 28, 29-33, 36-38 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fakoorian et al. (US 2020/0267756 A1) in view of Ki et al. (US 2011/0164560) further in view of Myung et al. (US 2021/0360673 A1). For claims 21, 29, and 37 Fakoorian teaches a method implemented in a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (see paragraph 6 “a method implemented in UE (WTRU), the method comprising: receiving a first grant for a first set of slots, wherein the first grant is associated with a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process, and wherein the first grant indicates a HARQ process identifier associated with HARQ process (see paragraph 6 “DCI that includes an uplink grant and a time domain resource assignment for transmitting one or more data repetitions of uplink data… symbols within first slot and symbols within a second slot…a slot format…subset of plurality of symbols within a slot”, paragraph 8 “The instructions may be executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to receive, from a base station, signaling including an uplink grant for one or more data repetitions, the uplink grant including a time domain resource assignment that spans a set of slots for the one or more data repetitions (HARQ)”, paragraphs 94-95 “DEs 115 and base stations 105 may support retransmissions of data to increase the likelihood that data is received successfully… where the device may provide HARQ feedback in a specific slot for data received in a previous symbol in the slot. In other cases, the device may provide HARQ feedback in a subsequent slot, or according to some other time interval. ); determining that a first subset of the first set of slots is available for uplink transmission and that a second subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink transmission (see paragraph 47 “uplink grant includes an indication of availability of downlink symbols (is a resource or could be a slot resource) or flexible symbols for the one or more data repetitions, and the determining the subset of the plurality of symbols for scheduling the one or more data repetitions may be based on the indication” and paragraph 159 “the UE may determine that the repetition 610-b may not have symbols available to transmit uplink data”, paragraph 227 and claim 37 “the uplink grant comprises an indication of availability of downlink symbols or flexible symbols for the one or more data repetitions, and the determining the subset of the plurality of symbols for scheduling the one or more data repetitions is based at least in part on the indication”); transmitting a first segment of a transport block (TB) in the first subset of the first set of slots (see claim 17 “the method of claim 1, further comprising: segmenting a first repetition (can be replaced by a first segment of TB) of the one or more data repetitions into a plurality of data sub-repetitions based at least in part on identifying that one or more symbols of the subset allocated for transmission of the first repetition crosses a slot boundary between consecutive slots of the plurality of slots, wherein transmitting the one or more data repetitions comprises: transmitting the plurality of data sub-repetitions within the one or more symbols of the subset allocated for transmission of the first repetition”, pargraph 27-253 “different segmentation and slot configuration”, pargraph 67 “multi-segment”, paragraph 94 “A Medium Access Control (MAC) layer may perform priority handling and multiplexing of logical channels into transport channels. The MAC layer may also use hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) to provide retransmission at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency” and paragraph 133 “the mini-slot duration may depend on the number of symbols between the starting symbol and a last symbol in the first slot N, a transport block (TB) size of data to be transmitted in the data repetitions 310, and a threshold coding rate”); receiving a second grant for a second set of slots, wherein the second grant is associated with the HARQ process, and wherein the first grant indicates a HARQ process identifier associated with HARQ process (see paragraph 43 “a second grant including a second time domain resource assignment associated with a second traffic type, and identifying a second subset of the plurality of symbols for scheduling a data communication over the second time domain resource assignment based on the dynamic slot format indication”, paragraph 94 “A Medium Access Control (MAC) layer may perform priority handling and multiplexing of logical channels into transport channels. The MAC layer may also use hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) to provide retransmission at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency”, and paragraph 133 “the mini-slot duration may depend on the number of symbols between the starting symbol and a last symbol in the first slot N, a transport block (TB) size of data to be transmitted in the data repetitions 310, and a threshold coding rate”) ; and transmitting a second segment of the TB in the second set of slots based on the second grant being associated with the HARQ process (see paragraph 133 “the mini-slot duration may depend on the number of symbols between the starting symbol and a last symbol in the first slot N, a transport block (TB) size of data to be transmitted in the data repetitions 310, and a threshold coding rate”). Fakoorian does not explicitly teach segmenting TB. However, Ki teaches Conventionally, if a MAC PDU or a segment of a MAC PDU is too large for a Transport Block (TB), a MAC segmentation entity of a transmitter segments the MAC PDU or the MAC PDU segment and constructs a TB with a segment, while storing the other segments. A Hybrid Automatic Repeat request (HARQ) entity of the transmitter transmits the TB to a receiver (see Ki: paragraph 17). In addition, Ki teaches a wireless communication system includes segmenting a MAC PDU into a first MAC PDU segment and a second MAC PDU segment, transmitting the first MAC PDU segment to a receiver(see Ki: paragraph 28). In addition, Ki teaches The available resources may be determined according to a Transport Block (TB) size. The available resources may be determined according to space of the TB determined by a selected Transport Format Combination (TFC) (see Ki: paragraphs 30-31). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Ki in the uplink transmission of Fakoorian to segment a large TB into multiple segments for uplink transmission conventionally (see Ki: paragraph 17). Fakoorian in view of Ki does not explicitly teach wherein the first grant indicates a HARQ process identifier associated with HARQ process. However, Myung teaches HARQ_ID_ref is a HARQ process ID of UL-SCH in a reference subframe nref (Myung: paragraph 383). In addition, Myung teaches in the UL LBT process, when a UL grant is received in nth subframe, a first subframe of the latest UL transmission burst before the (n-3)th subframe is set as the reference subframe, and the contention window size is adjusted based on an NDI for an HARQ process ID corresponding to the reference subframe (Myung: paragraph 383). In addition, Myung teaches The BS may schedule a PUSCH in units of CBG to the UE with a specific HARQ process ID through the UL grant and indicate retransmission of only some CBGs that fail to decode through the CBGTI through the UL grant (Myung: paragraph 550). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Myung in the combined uplink transmission of Ki and Fakoorian in order to assign HARQ process ID to HARQ_ID_ref as reference subframe nref (Myung: paragraph 383). For claims 22 and 30 Fakoorian in view of Ki and further in view of Myung teaches the method, wherein the second segment of the TB is not sent in the first set of slots, and the second segment of the TB is transmitted in the second set of slots based on the second grant being associated with the HARQ process and the second segment of the TB not being transmitted from the first set of slots (as discussed in claim 1-a design configuration). For claims 23 and 31 Fakoorian in view of Ki and further in view of Myung teaches the method, further comprising segmenting the TB into the first segment and the second segment (see Ki: paragraph 28-31 “TB segmented into multiple segments”). For claims 24, 32, and 38 Fakoorian in view of Ki and further in view of Myung teaches the method, wherein determining that the second subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink transmission is based on one or more of a slot format indicator (SFI) or (see Fakoorian: paragraph 112 “SFI included in MAC-CE”, Fig. 9 “Slot Format Component 945”), and pargraph 35 “semi-static and dynamic slot format indicator”). For claims 25, 33, and 40 Fakoorian in view of Ki and further in view of Myung teaches the method, wherein the first grant is received via a first downlink control information (DCI) and the second grant is received via a second DCI (see Fakoorian: paragraph 139 “UE may use the slot format indicated in a first grant it receives”, pargraph 164 “first grant and second grant”, paragraphs 6, 66, 114, 119, 124, 128, and 151 “DCI includes uplink grant”) . For claims 28 and 36 Fakoorian in view of Ki and further in view of Myung teaches the method, wherein the second set of slots is a same number of slots as the second subset of the first set of slots (as discussed in claims 21-26 and design configuration). Allowable Subject Matter 6. Claims 26-27, 34-35, and 39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Marinier et al. (US 2025/005503 A1). 8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David M OVEISSI whose telephone number is (571)270-3127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8Am-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, 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. /MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 26, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 04, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 31, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598018
METHOD FOR MITIGATING INTERFERENCE FROM COEXISTING OFDM-BASED RADIO ACCESS TECHNOLOGIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598618
SOUNDING REFERENCE SIGNAL RESOURCE INDICATORS ASSOCIATED WITH CONFIGURED GRANT PHYSICAL UPLINK SHARED CHANNEL REPETITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581322
TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION METHOD, TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION DETERMINATION METHOD, BASE STATION AND TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574982
COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562842
TRANSPORT BLOCK SCALING FOR PHYSICAL UPLINK SHARED CHANNEL REPETITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
83%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+11.6%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 893 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