Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/187,872

COMPENSATED MESH NETWORKING THROUGH INTERNET-OF-THINGS (IOT) EXTENSION

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 22, 2023
Examiner
RACHEDINE, MOHAMMED
Art Unit
2646
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
663 granted / 763 resolved
+24.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
778
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
§103
62.3%
+22.3% vs TC avg
§102
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
§112
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 763 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2023 have been considered by the examiner and been placed of record in the file. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Group I consisting of claims 1-2, 8-9 and 15-16 with traverse in the reply filed on 1/5/2026 has been acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that “the identified species are not patentably distinct and do not impose an undue search or examination burden”, (Remarks page 1). This is not found to be persuasive because the groups belong in different classes requiring different field of search. Searching different class/subclass or employing different search queries are proper showing of serious burden. (MPEP 808.02). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-2, 8-9 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Independent claims 1, 8, and 15 recite the limitation “signal is beneficial to the wireless network”. It is unclear what the applicant meant to convey with the term “beneficial” as the term is only defined in open-ended exemplary manner (“For example, based on the received technical attributes of the opted-in IoT device, MNE program 107 may utilize known methods to calculate a Wi-Fi transmission range of the opted-in IoT device and determine if adding that transmission range capability at the location of the opted-in IoT device results in a positive range extension of the wireless network”, Paragraph [0038]). 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. 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. Claims 1-2, 8-9 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IPCOM000268050D (Selectively Relaying Messages on a Mobile Device for a Trusted Contact Based on Metadata) (hereinafter IPCOM000268050D). Claim 1. IPCOM000268050D discloses A computer-implemented method (read as a mechanism that sends a message … Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) (2nd and 4th paragraphs). Devices used to form a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) must include computer and software in order to function and perform as expected. Flowchart shown in the figure), the method comprising: receiving an opt-in from a user to re-broadcast a signal of a wireless network via an internet-of-things (IoT) device of the user (read as When an app identifies the lack of a data connection, the app asks the user whether the user wants to send via a third party. If the user would like to send via a third party… (3rd paragraph)); receiving contextual and technical attributes of the IoT device (read as Device A broadcasts a Bluetooth* low energy (LE) request containing the user's ID (contact info) hash and the app for which info is to be relayed. Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) ad-hoc connection with a potential proxy device (Device B) (3rd and 4th paragraphs)); identifying metadata of the wireless network (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)); and responsive to determining, based on analysis of the received contextual and technical attributes and the identified metadata (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)), that use of the IoT device to re-broadcast the signal is beneficial to the wireless network (the term “beneficial” is not explicitly defined. Also the term use renders this clause as intended use), re-broadcasting the signal via the IoT device and granting access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as All Bluetooth LE-capable devices in range receive the broadcast and check the hash and app to verify whether the device recognizes the sender and can relay for that app (4th paragraph)). IPCOM000268050D does not explicitly disclose internet of things (IoT). However, a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) can be used to interface and control different devices through the internet. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to use the teaching of IPCOM000268050D in order to achieve all limitations of the claimed invention namely the idea of realizing an effective mesh connected IoT network. Claim 2. The method of claim 1, IPCOM000268050D discloses, further comprising: responsive to determining that the IoT device has ceased to re-broadcast the signal, denying access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as If a selected proxy device refuses to relay the message, the system notifies the user. At this point, the solution drops the PAN ad-hoc connection (6th paragraph)). Claim 8. IPCOM000268050D discloses A computer system, the computer system comprising: one or more processors, one or more computer-readable memories, one or more computer-readable tangible storage medium, and program instructions stored on at least one of the one or more tangible storage medium for execution by at least one of the one or more processors via at least one of the one or more memories, wherein the computer system is capable of performing a method (read as a mechanism that sends a message … Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) (2nd and 4th paragraphs). Devices used to form a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) must include computer and software in order to function and perform as expected. ) comprising: receiving an opt-in from a user to re-broadcast a signal of a wireless network via an internet-of-things (IoT) device of the user (read as When an app identifies the lack of a data connection, the app asks the user whether the user wants to send via a third party. If the user would like to send via a third party… (3rd paragraph)) receiving contextual and technical attributes of the IoT device (read as Device A broadcasts a Bluetooth* low energy (LE) request containing the user's ID (contact info) hash and the app for which info is to be relayed. Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) ad-hoc connection with a potential proxy device (Device B) (3rd and 4th paragraphs)); identifying metadata of the wireless network (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)); and responsive to determining, based on analysis of the received contextual and technical attributes and the identified metadata (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)), that use of the IoT device to re-broadcast the signal is beneficial to the wireless network (the term “beneficial” is not explicitly defined. Also the term use renders this clause as intended use), re-broadcasting the signal via the IoT device and granting access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as All Bluetooth LE-capable devices in range receive the broadcast and check the hash and app to verify whether the device recognizes the sender and can relay for that app (4th paragraph)). IPCOM000268050D does not explicitly disclose internet of things (IoT). However, a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) can be used to interface and control different devices through the internet. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to use the teaching of IPCOM000268050D in order to achieve all limitations of the claimed invention namely the idea of realizing an effective mesh connected IoT network. Claim 9. The computer system of claim 8, IPCOM000268050D discloses, wherein the method further comprises: responsive to determining that the IoT device has ceased to re-broadcast the signal, denying access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as If a selected proxy device refuses to relay the message, the system notifies the user. At this point, the solution drops the PAN ad-hoc connection (6th paragraph)). Claim 15. IPCOM000268050D discloses A computer program product, the computer program product comprising: one or more computer-readable tangible storage medium (the term “computer-readable tangible storage medium” is considered as non-transitory as described in [0016] of the specifications) and program instructions stored on at least one of the one or more tangible storage medium, the program instructions executable by a processor capable of performing a method (read as a mechanism that sends a message … Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) (2nd and 4th paragraphs). Devices used to form a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) must include computer and software in order to function and perform as expected by executing the flowchart shown in the figure), the method comprising: receiving an opt-in from a user to re-broadcast a signal of a wireless network via an internet-of-things (IoT) device of the user (read as When an app identifies the lack of a data connection, the app asks the user whether the user wants to send via a third party. If the user would like to send via a third party… (3rd paragraph)) receiving contextual and technical attributes of the IoT device (read as Device A broadcasts a Bluetooth* low energy (LE) request containing the user's ID (contact info) hash and the app for which info is to be relayed. Device A creates a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) ad-hoc connection with a potential proxy device (Device B) (3rd and 4th paragraphs)); identifying metadata of the wireless network (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)); and responsive to determining, based on analysis of the received contextual and technical attributes and the identified metadata (read as transmitting metadata to confirm the app and size of payload (4th paragraph)), that use of the IoT device to re-broadcast the signal is beneficial to the wireless network (the term “beneficial” is not explicitly defined. Also the term use renders this clause as intended use), re-broadcasting the signal via the IoT device and granting access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as All Bluetooth LE-capable devices in range receive the broadcast and check the hash and app to verify whether the device recognizes the sender and can relay for that app (4th paragraph)). IPCOM000268050D does not explicitly disclose internet of things (IoT). However, a Bluetooth Personal Area Network (PAN) can be used to interface and control different devices through the internet. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to use the teaching of IPCOM000268050D in order to achieve all limitations of the claimed invention namely the idea of realizing an effective mesh connected IoT network. Claim 16. The computer program product of claim 15, IPCOM000268050D discloses, wherein the method further comprises: responsive to determining that the IoT device has ceased to re-broadcast the signal, denying access to the wireless network via the IoT device (read as If a selected proxy device refuses to relay the message, the system notifies the user. At this point, the solution drops the PAN ad-hoc connection (6th paragraph)). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892. Among prior art included in PTO-892, Anantharaman et al. (US 12425297 B2) IoT devices dynamically connected in different configurations, where some acts a replays or repeaters. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED RACHEDINE whose telephone number is (571)272-9249. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5. 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, Jeanette J. Parker can be reached at (571)270-3647. 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. MOHAMMED . RACHEDINE Examiner Art Unit 2649 /MOHAMMED RACHEDINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604278
5G INTER- AND INTRA-NETWORK NODE COORDINATION FOR POWER CONSUMPTION OPTIMIZATION AND REDUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598053
DISTRIBUTED RADIO FEED-FORWARD CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598013
ROBUST BROADCAST VIA RELAYED RETRANSMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593229
NETWORK DATA ANALYTICS PROFILING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571901
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR RFID TAG LOCATING USING CONSTRUCTIVE INTERFERENCE
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
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+11.3%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 763 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