Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/007,977

MULTIPLE CHANNEL COMMUNICATION IN UNLICENSED SPECTRUM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 02, 2022
Examiner
CHEN, PETER
Art Unit
2462
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Nokia Technologies Oy
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
398 granted / 455 resolved
+29.5% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
479
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 455 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered. 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 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 Status Claims 5, 8-9, 12, and 17 are canceled. Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-14, 18, and 20 are amended. No new claims are added. Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are currently pending for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks (on page 8-9), filed 12/27/2025, with respect to claims 1 and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(2) rejections of claims 1-11 and 13-20 have been withdrawn. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1 and 14 recite the phrase “may be able to” in line 12, and line 8 respectively. Language that suggests or makes optional (i.e., may be able to) but does not require step to be performed or does not limit the scope of the claim to a particular structure or does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation(s). Such clauses may render parts of the claim(s) optional (see MPEP 2106 and 2111.04). Claim 14 recites “at least one other of said plurality of channels” in line 9. For clarity and consistency, it is suggested to amend to -- at least one other channel of said plurality of channels --. Claim 14 recites “said further transmitting opportunity” in line 25. For clarity and consistency, it is suggested to amend to -- said one of said at least one further transmitting opportunities --. Appropriate corrections are required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the current deferral allowance” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 11 recites the limitation “said one or more signals” in line 2. It is unclear whether “said one or more signals” refers to “transmit a signal” recited in claim 1, line 9, or “receive a signal” recited in claim 1, line 14, or “control transmission of a signal” recited in claim 1, line 21, or “transmission of at least one signal” recited in claim 1, line 24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 recites the limitation “the current deferral allowance” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 recites the limitation “said at least one further signal” in line 24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 19 recites the limitation “said method” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 2-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13, 15-16, and 18-20 are also rejected for the same reasoning as being indefinite since they are dependent upon the rejected claims 1 and 14 respectively. Appropriate corrections are required. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-16, and 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection(s) and the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1-4, 6-7, 10-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are allowable over the prior art of record (cited in PTO-892 and IDS) since the prior art of record does not teach or render obvious to disclose the combined claimed limitations recited as-a-whole as interpreted in light of the specification and Applicant’s persuasive arguments. Conclusion A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7241. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm. 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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. /PETER CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 02, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 25, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604361
TECHNIQUES FOR DISCONTINUOUS RECEPTION COLLISION RESOLUTION FOR MULTI-SIM USER EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593242
APPLICATION SPECIFIC TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL PROFILE PARAMETERS TO IMPROVE RESILIENCY IN COMMUNICATION SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574168
COMMUNICATIONS DEVICES, INFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT AND METHODS FOR COMMUNICATING VIA AN ACCESS INTERFACE DIVIDED INTO MULTIPLE BANDWIDTH PARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568457
Time of Arrival Method for UE Positioning in Distributed RAN System Architecture
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557161
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECONDARY NODE OR CELL GROUP ADDITION IN A COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 455 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