Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/136,579

Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request Feedback with Multi-cell Downlink Control Information

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 19, 2023
Examiner
OVEISSI, MANSOUR
Art Unit
2415
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Ofinno LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
741 granted / 893 resolved
+25.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
935
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 893 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Status of Claims 2. This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 12/01/2025. Claims 1 and through 20 are presently pending and are presented for examination. 3. 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. Response to Arguments 4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5. 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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Lei (US 2023/0319843 A1) in view of Yang et al. (US 2021/0112578 A1). For claims 1, 9, and 17 Lei teaches a wireless device (Fig. 1 “wireless device 101”) comprising: one or more processors (Fig. 5 “processor 506”); and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (Fig. 5 “Non-transitory computer-readable memory”), causes the wireless device to: receive, via a first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring occasion, a downlink control information (DCI) scheduling physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) receptions on a plurality of cells (paragraph 6 “DCI scheduling PDSCH on plurality of serving cells”), wherein: the DCI comprises a downlink assignment index (DAI) field with a value indicating an accumulative number of one or more pairs of: PDCCH monitoring occasion and cell with a smallest cell index among the plurality of cells (paragraph 32 “DCI includes DAI field with a value denoting accumulative PDCCH monitoring occasion pair(s)- the accumulative number may be incremented first in ascending order (smallest index) of the serving cell index and then in ascending order of the PDCCH monitoring occasion index”); and transmit a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgment (HARQ-ACK) codebook comprising feedback bits of the PDSCH receptions, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook is based on the value (paragraph 56 “HARQ-ACK codebook bits according to indicated values”). Although Lei teaches the accumulative number may be incremented first in ascending order (smallest index) of the serving cell index (see paragraph 32), Lei does not explicitly teach smallest cell index. However, Yang teaches in this example, the BS may configure PDCCH communication 2 to include a counter DAI and total DAI pair of (1,3) because PDSCH communication 2 is scheduled to be transmitted in cell 1. In this case, the counter DAI of PDCCH communication 2 is 1 because cell 1 is the lowest cell index associated with the PDCCH monitoring occasion (see Yang: pargraph 44). Hence, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention in the art to use the teachings of Yang in the HARQ-ACK codebook method of Lei in order to design a lowest (smallest) cell index to be associated with the PDCCH monitoring occasion. For claims 2, 10, and 18 Lei teaches the wireless device, wherein the instructions further cause the wireless device to: receive, via a second PDCCH monitoring occasion, a second DCI indicating a second DAI field having a second value based on the value of the DAI (paragraph 32 “DCI includes DAI field with a value denoting accumulative PDCCH monitoring occasion pair(s)”); and transmit, based on a timing order of the first PDCCH monitoring occasion and the second PDCCH monitoring occasion, a second HARQ-ACK codebook comprising second feedback bits corresponding to the DCI and the second DCI (paragraph 32 “DCI includes DAI field with a value denoting accumulative PDCCH monitoring occasion pair(s)”). For claims 3 and 11 Lei teaches the wireless device of claim 2, wherein the DCI and the second DCI schedule the PDSCH receptions for at least two of the plurality of cells (paragraph 6 “plurality of DCI scheduling PDSCH on a plurality of cells”). For claims 4 and 12 Lei teaches the wireless device of claim 2, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook are a same HARQ-ACK codebook (paragraph 6 “generating HARQ-ACK based on first indication information and second indication information in the plurality of DCI formats; and transmitting HARQ-ACK codebook-having the same HARQ-ACK codebook is a design choice”). For claims 5, 13, and 19 Lei teaches the wireless device, wherein the instructions further cause the wireless device to receive one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages indicating one or more DCI formats indicating one or more downlink resources for the PDSCH receptions on one or more of the plurality of cells (paragraph 3 “RRC includes DCI for PDSCH scheduling”). For claims 6, 14, and 20 Lei teaches the wireless device, wherein the DCI comprises resource assignment fields indicating time resources and frequency resources for the PDSCH receptions on the plurality of cells (paragraph 42 “DAI indicate frequency and time resources for PDSCH”). For claims 7 and 15 Lei teaches the wireless device wherein each PDSCH reception, of the PDSCH receptions, is scheduled on a respective cell of the plurality of cells (paragraph 32 “PDSCH receptions associated … up to current serving cells”). For claims 8 and 16Lei teaches the wireless device, wherein the DAI field indicates a counter DAI (C-DAI) value (paragraph 30 “a DCI format may include at least one of a counter DAI field and a total DAI field”). Conclusion 6. Applicant's amendment 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. 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David M OVEISSI whose telephone number is (571)270-3127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8Am-5PM. 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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270 - 1215. 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. /MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 19, 2023
Application Filed
May 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 01, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598018
METHOD FOR MITIGATING INTERFERENCE FROM COEXISTING OFDM-BASED RADIO ACCESS TECHNOLOGIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598618
SOUNDING REFERENCE SIGNAL RESOURCE INDICATORS ASSOCIATED WITH CONFIGURED GRANT PHYSICAL UPLINK SHARED CHANNEL REPETITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581322
TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION METHOD, TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION DETERMINATION METHOD, BASE STATION AND TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574982
COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562842
TRANSPORT BLOCK SCALING FOR PHYSICAL UPLINK SHARED CHANNEL REPETITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
83%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+11.6%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 893 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