Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/039,486

TIMING ADJUSTMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
May 30, 2023
Priority
Nov 30, 2020 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2020132913
Examiner
PHILLIPS, HASSAN A
Art Unit
2400
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Beijing Xiaomi Mobile Software Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
11%
Grant Probability
At Risk
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
25%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 11% of cases
11%
Career Allowance Rate
3 granted / 27 resolved
-46.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
6 currently pending
Career history
30
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.5%
+2.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 27 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
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 . Allowable Subject Matter The indicated allowability of claims 2-7 and 23-28 is withdrawn in view of 101 issues found in the pending claims and in view of further consideration given to previously cited reference(s) to Ghanbarinejad et al (hereinafter Ghan) US PGPUB 2023/0247574. Rejections based on the 101 issues and the previously cited reference(s) follow. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1, 3-5, 10, 21, 24-26, 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. With regards to independent claims 1, 21, and 32 the claim(s) recite(s) determining an uplink transmission timing error and determining an adjustment approach for uplink transmission timing information. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitations of determining an uplink transmission timing error and determining an adjustment approach for uplink transmission timing information are limitations that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind. Nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, claims 1, 21, and 32 recite an abstract idea. Furthermore, dependent claims 3-5, 10, 24-26, 31 and 33 fail to cure the deficiencies of independent claims 1, 21 and 32 and are rejected under the same rationale. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the determining steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instruction to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – Claim(s) 1, 8-10, 21, 29-33, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ghan. Regarding claims 1, 21, 32 and 33, Ghan discloses A method for adjusting timing, performed by a terminal, comprising: determining, according to downlink timing information, an uplink transmission timing error, (“misalignment value”, [0444]); and determining, according to the uplink transmission timing error, an adjustment approach for uplink transmission timing information, (“In the case that a TX timing alignment method (Case-6) is employed at the TX IAB node (aggressor node), the uplink timing of the SRS transmission can be directly obtained from the downlink timing of the SSB transmission with a zero timing offset”, [0444]). Regarding claims 8 and 29, Ghan discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving a downlink reference signal; and obtaining the downlink timing information through the downlink reference signal, (0004]). Regarding claims 9 and 30, Ghan discloses The method according to claim 8, wherein the downlink reference signal comprises at least one of: Synchronization Signal Block (SSB), [0443]; or Channel-State Information Reference Signal (CSI-RS), [0401]. Regarding claims 10 and 31, Ghan discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: reporting timing adjustment capability information of the terminal, wherein the timing adjustment capability information is configured to inform a base station that the terminal has a capability to adjust the uplink transmission timing information at one shot, ([0069], [0374]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6, 7, 27, 28 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhou et al. US PGPUB 2022/0217600 (see [0022], [0023] – with “drift” interpreted as applicants claimed “timing error”). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN A PHILLIPS whose telephone number is (571)272-3940. 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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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. /HASSAN A PHILLIPS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 30, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §102
Jan 05, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 18, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12727054
METHOD, APPARATUS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12501481
Random Access Procedures Using Repetition
3y 3m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent null
Solution for attach peak
Granted
Patent null
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ROUTING A PACKET IN MOBILE IP SYSTEM
Granted
Patent null
METHOD AND SYSTEM OF OPERATING A MULTI-USER SYSTEM
Granted
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
11%
Grant Probability
25%
With Interview (+14.1%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 27 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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