Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/013,712

CONTROL INFORMATION THAT SCHEDULES OR ACTIVATES MULTIPLE TRANSMISSIONS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 29, 2022
Examiner
ABELSON, RONALD B
Art Unit
2476
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
LENOVO (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD.
OA Round
4 (Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
1179 granted / 1307 resolved
+32.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-1.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1338
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
58.1%
+18.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§112
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1307 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 6, 13, 17, 21, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda US 20210378006 in view of Jung US 20180132264. Regarding claims 6, 13, 17, 21, Takeda teaches user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: receive downlink control information comprising a format that indicates a set of parameters for at least one transmissions across a plurality of slots; wherein a time-domain resource assignment for the at least one transmission is indicated by a time-domain resource assignment field in the received downlink control information, and wherein the time-domain resource assignment field indicates an index corresponding to a time-domain resource assignment table configured by higher layer signaling ([0105, 0106]). Takeda is silent on wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots. Jung teaches wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots ([0156] FIG. 8 depicts multi-slot scheduling between a gNB and a UE, such as the UE 205 and gNB 210. When the UE 205 receives a DL data resource assignment (e.g. a PDSCH resource assignment), the resource assignment may be applicable to a single slot or multiple slots. As depicted, the UE 205 may receive downlink control signal (e.g., DCI) with a resource assignment applicable to slot 0, slot 1, slot 2, and slot 3. When the resource assignment is applicable to multiple slots, data sent over the multiple slots may be sent as one transport block (“TB”) or media access control layer protocol data unit (“MAC PDU”) or can be sent as multiple TBs or MAC PDUs). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Takeda by wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots, as shown by Jung. This modification would benefit the system by informing the UE of the number of slots available for transmitting a single TB multiple times. Regarding claim 23, the format schedules at least one new transport block (TB) (Takeda: [0105, 0106]: Examiner assumes format indicates a new TB), a retransmission of at least one old TB, or a repetition of the at least one new transport block for a first transmission, or a second transmission, or both. Claim(s) 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 17, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou EP 3200542 in view of Takeda, and Jung. Regarding claims 6, 13, 17, 21, Zhou teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: receive downlink control information comprising a format that indicates a set of parameters for at least one transmissions across a plurality of slots (fig. 7 DCI: DL&UL, downlink and uplink scheduling information of UE, time-frequency resource used when base station 10 sends DLPN and time frequency resource used when UE sends ULPN, [0128]). Zhou is silent on wherein a time-domain resource assignment for the at least one transmission is indicated by a time-domain resource assignment field in the received downlink control information, and wherein the time-domain resource assignment field indicates an index corresponding to a time-domain resource assignment table configured by higher layer signaling. Takeda teaches wherein a time-domain resource assignment for the at least one transmission is indicated by a time-domain resource assignment field in the received downlink control information, and wherein the time-domain resource assignment field indicates an index corresponding to a time-domain resource assignment table configured by higher layer signaling ([0105, 0106]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Zhou by wherein a time-domain resource assignment for the at least one transmission is indicated by a time-domain resource assignment field in the received downlink control information, and wherein the time-domain resource assignment field indicates an index corresponding to a time-domain resource assignment table configured by higher layer signaling, as shown by Takeda. This modification would benefit the system by providing a proven, reliable method for the UE to receive transmission parameters. The combination is silent on wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots. Jung teaches wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots ([0156] FIG. 8 depicts multi-slot scheduling between a gNB and a UE, such as the UE 205 and gNB 210. When the UE 205 receives a DL data resource assignment (e.g. a PDSCH resource assignment), the resource assignment may be applicable to a single slot or multiple slots. As depicted, the UE 205 may receive downlink control signal (e.g., DCI) with a resource assignment applicable to slot 0, slot 1, slot 2, and slot 3. When the resource assignment is applicable to multiple slots, data sent over the multiple slots may be sent as one transport block (“TB”) or media access control layer protocol data unit (“MAC PDU”) or can be sent as multiple TBs or MAC PDUs). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Takeda by wherein an indication of a quantity of slots for a multiple-slot single transport block (TB) transmission enables transmission of a single TB across multiple slots, as shown by Jung. This modification would benefit the system by informing the UE of the number of slots available for transmitting a single TB multiple times. Regarding claim 7, 14, 22, the control information format schedules a first at least one transport block for downlink transmission across a first at least one transmission time interval (Zhou: DL, downlink information of UE, time-frequency, [0128]) and a second at least one transport block for uplink transmission across a second at least one transmission time interval (Zhou: UL, uplink scheduling information of UE, time-frequency, [0128]). Regarding claim 9, the control information format schedules at least one new transport block (Zhou: fig. 7 DCI: DL&UL, downlink and uplink scheduling information of UE, time-frequency resource used when base station 10 sends DLPN and time frequency resource used when UE sends ULPN, [0128]), a retransmission of at least one old transport block, or a repetition of the at least one new transport block for the first transmission, the second transmission, or a combination thereof. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended independent claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment ,10/10/25, necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD B ABELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3165. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30. 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. /RONALD B ABELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 06, 2025
Interview Requested
May 22, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 22, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 20, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 10, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 16, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 30, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 30, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604303
SIGNAL TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598623
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND RELATED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598499
INTERFERENCE MEASUREMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS, TERMINAL, AND NETWORK SIDE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598532
Session Management Function Entity Selection Method, Apparatus, and System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587309
BLIND DECODING LIMIT TECHNIQUES FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (-1.0%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1307 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