Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/036,061

USER EQUIPMENT COORDINATED RADAR SENSING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 09, 2023
Examiner
PHAM, TIMOTHY X
Art Unit
3648
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Google LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
814 granted / 946 resolved
+34.0% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
970
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.7%
-31.3% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 946 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of group I corresponding to claims 1-6, 8-13, and 21 in the reply filed on 10/03/2025 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowers et al. (US 2014/0009275) in view Roger et al. (US 2021/0190905). Regarding claims 1 and 21, Bowers discloses a first user equipment (UE) and a method, by the first user equipment (UE) of a plurality of UEs in a cellular network (Fig. 1 references 101, 103, 104), the method comprising: determining a configuration to coordinate the plurality of UEs to detect one or more objects (paragraphs [0037], [0040]; e.g., the sensing system 110 may coordinate sensor operation with other vehicles); configuring, based on the configuration, a second UE of the plurality of UEs to transmit a first radar signal and a third UE of the plurality of UEs to detect the first radar signal (paragraphs [0110], [0113]; e.g., the sensing system 110 generating one or more detection signals configured to be received by one or more other sensing systems 570 and/or 580); It is noted that sensing system 110 is the first UE, sensing system 570 is the second UE, and sensing system 580 is the third UE; receiving, from the third UE, first radar signal samples based on the third UE receiving the first radar signal in a plurality of reflection states (paragraph [0112]-[0113]; e.g., the detection signal may be received by a receiver 584 of the sensing system 580 and may provide information pertaining to the vehicle 522. The sensing system 580 may fuse sensor data received in response to self-emitted detection signal(s) with the sensor data received in response to the detection signal emitted by the vehicle 102); and responsive to filtering the first radar signal samples, determining object location information based on at least the filtered first radar signal samples (paragraphs [0063], [0154]; e.g., The collision detection system 101 may be further configured to adapt the deployment of the safety systems to the imminent collision (e.g., adapt safety system deployment in accordance with the location on the vehicle 102 where a collision impact is to occur)). Bowers fails to specifically disclose filtering the first radar signal samples to remove samples associated with interference from the third UE receiving the first radar signal in a first reflection state of the plurality of reflection states. Roger discloses filtering the first radar signal samples to remove samples associated with interference from the third UE receiving the first radar signal in a first reflection state of the plurality of reflection states (paragraphs [0080]-[0081]; e.g., a processing unit configured to receive the sequence of samples associated with the scanning chirp and to identify, in the sequence of samples, impaired samples). Therefore, taking the teachings of Bowers in combination of Roger as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to filtering the first radar signal samples to remove samples associated with interference from the third UE receiving the first radar signal in a first reflection state of the plurality of reflection states for advantages of enhancing radar sensing techniques that may allow improved target detection in the presence of interference (Roger: paragraph [0002]). Regarding claim 2, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first reflection state of the plurality of reflection states is a direct reception state where the third UE receives the first radar signal directly from the second UE, and wherein a second reflection state of the plurality of reflection states is a reflected state where the third UE receives the first radar signal reflected by one or more objects (Bowers: paragraph [0109], [0113]; e.g., The sensing system 580 may fuse sensor data received in response to self-emitted detection signal(s) with the sensor data received in response to the detection signal emitted by the vehicle 102). Regarding claim 3, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the configuration comprises at least one of: receiving a first portion of the configuration from a base station; or generating a second portion of the configuration locally at the first UE (Bowers: paragraphs [0040], [0045];e .g., The sensing system 110 may be configured to provide sensor data to other vehicles 103, 104 and/or receive sensor data from other vehicles 103, 104). Regarding claim 4, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the configuration comprises: receiving an air interface resource allocation from a base station; selecting a subset of air interface resources from the air interface resource allocation for transmission and reception of the first radar signal; and determining a waveform for the first radar signal (Bowers: paragraphs [0043], [0072], [0109], [111]). Regarding claim 5, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein configuring the second UE comprises: configuring the second UE to transmit, as the first radar signal, a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or a Random Access Channel (RACH) signal utilized by the second UE for cellular signaling (Bowers: paragraph [0115], [0121], [0145]). Regarding claim 6, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein configuring the second UE to transmit the first radar signal comprises at least one of: Sending a message to the second UE identifying a waveform to be utilized as the first radar signal and further identifying transmission parameters for transmitting the first radar signal; or sending a message to the third UE identifying a plurality of attributes associated with the first radar signal comprising a waveform attribute of the first radar signal and timing attributes associated with transmission of the first radar signal (Bowers: paragraph [0128]; e.g., The coordination may comprise coordinating a phase, amplitude, and/or timing of detection signals emitted by the emitters 512, 572, and/or 582 (e.g., using beamforming and/or phased array techniques)). Regarding claim 8, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein configuring the third UE to detect the first radar signal comprises: sending a message to the third UE comprising a beamforming configuration to be utilized by the third UE to mitigate interference from the second UE when transmitting the first radar signal (Bowers: paragraphs [0108], [0114], [0121]; e.g., Sensor cooperation may comprise coordinating one or more detection signals emitted by one or more sensing systems (e.g., beamforming, forming a phased array, or the like)). Regarding claim 9, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the second UE, second radar signal samples associated with the first radar signal transmitted by the second UE, wherein filtering the first radar signal samples comprises canceling the second radar signal samples from the first radar signal samples (Bowers: paragraph [0073]; e.g., Aligning may comprise time shifting and/or time aligning the sensor data 227 relative to other sensor data samples and/or streams) and (Roger: paragraph [0030]). Regarding claim 10, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring a fourth UE of the plurality of UEs to detect the first radar signal; receiving, from the fourth UE, third radar signal samples based on the fourth UE receiving the first radar signal; and refining the object location information based on the second radar signal samples (Bowers: paragraphs [0073], [0128]). Regarding claim 11, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising: configuring a fourth UE of the plurality of UEs to transmit a second radar signal; receiving, from the third UE, fourth radar signal samples based on the third UE receiving the second radar signal in a plurality of reflection states; and refining the object location information based on the second radar signal samples (Bowers: paragraph [0073]) and (Roger: paragraph [0030]). Regarding claim 12, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring the second UE to detect a second radar signal; configurating the third UE to transmit the second radar signal; receiving, from the second UE, third radar signal samples based on the second UE receiving the second radar signal; and refining the object location information based on the third radar signal samples (Bowers: paragraphs [0109], [0118], [0122]). Regarding claim 13, Bowers in combination with Roger discloses the method of claim 1, wherein one of: the first UE and the third UE are a same user equipment or the third UE is a different user equipment from the first UE and the second UE (Bowers: Fig. 7 see 101, 570, 580). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY X PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7115. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30-5:00. 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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at 571-270-5144. 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. /TIMOTHY X PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2026
Interview Requested
Jan 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 15, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587969
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585006
ENHANCED MULTIPATH COMPONENT REPORTING IN NEW RADIO
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578451
PASSIVE RADAR SYSTEM FOR DETECTION OF LOW-PROFILE LOW ALTITUDE TARGETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574980
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PAIRING DEVICES IN A GYM ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571906
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING OBJECT PATTERNS USING ULTRA-WIDEBAND (UWB) RADAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.2%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 946 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month