Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/101,360

ESTABLISHING A WIRELESS CONNECTION WITH A MOBILE DEVICE

Final Rejection §101
Filed
Jan 25, 2023
Examiner
CUMMING, WILLIAM D
Art Unit
2645
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Cellxion Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
903 granted / 1005 resolved
+27.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1034
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
§103
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1005 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Drawings The drawings were received on February 5, 2026. These drawings are approved. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because an invention primarily intended for illegal purposes can lack patent utility because it is not considered "useful" in the context of patent law, which requires an invention to have a specific, substantial, and credible utility. An invention must provide some identifiable benefit to the public to be patentable. This invention is used only for an illegal purpose fails to meet this utility requirement and is thus unpatentable. Transmitting interference signals in the United States of America is illegal under the Communications Act of 1934 and subject to severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment, depending on the offense's severity. Deliberately interfering with radio communications is a crime under the Communications Act. Intentionally transmitting interference signals is a serious federal crime in the United States, punishable by substantial fines, seizure of equipment, and imprisonment. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) actively enforces these regulations, as signal interference can disrupt critical public safety communications, including 9-1-1 and GPS service. The FCC strictly regulates the radio frequency (RF) spectrum to prevent interference that could endanger authorized communications. Several laws govern this: 47 U.S. Code § 333: This law specifically prohibits willful or malicious interference with the radio communications of any licensed or authorized station, or any station operated by the U.S. government. 47 U.S. Code § 302(b): The manufacturing, importing, selling, or operating of signal jamming devices is illegal. 47 U.S. Code § 301: Unless you have a valid license or authorization under FCC rules, you are prohibited from operating or using radio transmitters Violators face severe penalties that can escalate for repeat offenses: Monetary fines: Fines can be thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. Equipment seizure: The FCC can seize any illegal radio equipment used to cause the interference. Imprisonment: Criminal sanctions, including jail time, are possible, particularly in cases of malicious or repeated violations. The invention transmits interference signals is illegal in the United States and hence the invention lacks any utility. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. If the United States Patent Office becomes aware of an invention that is potentially dangerous or illegal, the Examiner will typically reject the application and will not grant the patent. Inventions that are potentially dangerous or, in this case, illegal are not considered useful, and therefore do not meet the requirements for a patent. Applicant’s attorney arguments are generalities of other situations and does not specifically address the claimed invention. Applicant’s attorney states that ‘“in certain limited exceptions, use by Federal law enforcement agencies is authorized in accordance with applicable statutes" see also 47 C.F.R. § 2.807” by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). Did attorney submit any evidence that the claimed invention that the FCC authorized such exception? The answer is no. If Applicant has received such an exception from the FCC, the Examiner request that the Applicant submits to the USPTO such exception, and the Examiner will withdraw the rejection. Then Applicant’s attorney stated the rejection should be withdrawn because Federal law enforcement may receive an exemption for transmitting interference signal to interfere other signals. Does the specification clearly state that Applicant’s invention is for Federal law enforcement? The Examiner cannot find any this in the specification that the claimed invention is used for Federal law enforcement. The specification clearly states the claimed invention is for “…around an airport, stadium or other facility to provide limited or modified services…”, not Federal law enforcement or any law enforcement. Applicant’s attorney then argues “what if” and “could be”. Laws and regulations change over time. What is legal today can be illegal tomorrow and vice versa. The USPTO and the Examiner enforces Federal laws and regulation of today, not what it could be or what Applicant want to be. The Examiner suggests to remove the offensive phrases which the claim would address a more genetic and legal version of the claim. Applicant’s argument cannot take place of evidence. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. If applicants wish to request for an interview, an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form (PTOL-413A) should be submitted to the examiner prior to the interview in order to permit the examiner to prepare in advance for the interview and to focus on the issues to be discussed. This form should identify the participants of the interview, the proposed date of the interview, whether the interview will be personal, telephonic, or video conference, and should include a brief description of the issues to be discussed. A copy of the completed "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form should be attached to the Interview Summary form, PTOL-413 at the completion of the interview and a copy should be given to applicant or applicant's representative. If applicants request an interview after this final rejection, prior to the interview, the intended purpose and content of the interview should be presented briefly, in writing. Such an interview may be granted if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search will be denied. The USPTO will not accept requests for consideration under the AFCP 2.0 filed after December 14, 2024. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM D CUMMING whose telephone number is (571)272-7861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 noon to 6pm. 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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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. WILLIAM D. CUMMING Primary Examiner Art Unit 2645 /WILLIAM D CUMMING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Feb 05, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604298
METHODS, DEVICES, AND SYSTEMS FOR COORDINATING LEAVING PROCEDURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604189
SYSTEM AND APPARATUS FOR SELECTIVELY LIMITING USER CONTROL OF AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598573
ENHANCED MULTI-SATELLITE DOWNLINK CONNECTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587953
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND DEVICE USING UPF EVENT EXPOSURE SERVICE FOR CHARGING SERVICE IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588091
MULTI-LINK 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+5.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1005 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