Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/214,066

CELL DETERMINING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 26, 2023
Examiner
MURILLO GARCIA, FABRICIO R
Art Unit
2633
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
481 granted / 569 resolved
+22.5% vs TC avg
Strong +57% interview lift
Without
With
+56.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
606
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§112
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 569 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 . Response to Arguments Following response to arguments is based on Applicant’s arguments filed on 04 November 2025. Regarding Previous Claim Objections Previous rejection to claims 3, 5, 8, 11, 13, 16, 18 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment to the objected claims. Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 102 Applicant’s arguments [Pages 17-23] with respect to rejection of claims 1 and 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments [Pages 23-26] with respect to rejection of claim 17 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art reference(s). Regarding claim 17, on pages 23-26, Applicant argues that prior art of record fails to teach the incorporated limitations. Newly found reference Yang discloses a system (Fig. 1), where a UE receives from a first network information about a target network, where the received information comprises indicators about registration of the UE into the target network, identifiers for the UE to access the target network, PLMN indicators, SNPN indicators, SNPN granularity, and/or indicators granularity [Paragraphs 152, 248-249, 253, 266, 268-270, 302]. Therefore, in view of the above reasons, the Examiner maintains the rejections. Claim Status Claims 1, 3, 5, 8-9, 11, 13, 16-17, 20 have been amended. Claims 2, 4, 10, 12, 18-19 have been canceled. Claims 21-26 have been added. Thus, claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11, 13-17, 20-26 are presented for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Second Paragraph The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11, 13-16, 21-23, 24-26 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. For claim 1: At line 9, it is unclear whether it should be “target cell in the case where”. At line 11, it is unclear whether it should be “target cell in the case where”. At line 15, it is unclear whether it should be “and that the at least one item in the first”. At line 16, it is unclear whether it should be “the at least one item in the second”. For claim 3: At line 12, it is unclear whether it should be “with the network identity of the”. At line 13, it is unclear whether it should be “or the SNPN registered… or the”. For claim 9: This claim is rejected as applied to claim 1. For claim 11: This claim is rejected as applied to claim 3. For claims 3, 5-8, 11, 13-16, 21-26: These claims are also rejected as they depend upon a rejected claim. 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 of this title, 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 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chami (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0111759) in view of Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0174575). Regarding claim 17, Chami teaches a network device (Fig. 3), comprising: a processor ([Paragraphs 8, 67]); a transceiver coupled to the processor ([Paragraph 67]); and a memory for storing program codes executable by the processor ([Paragraph 75]); wherein the processor is configured to send first configuration information to a terminal device (UE 1 receives commands to search and reselect a cell [Paragraphs 12-13, 85]); [ . However, Chami does not explicitly mention: wherein the first configuration information comprises configuration information corresponding to a third-party network, and the third-party network is a network other than a subscribed network of the terminal device, wherein the first configuration information comprises at least one of the following: Stand-alone Non-public Network (SNPN) configuration information; or first indication information indicating whether authentication of the terminal device is allowed to be performed through a third-party network; or first group identity information that allows the authentication of the terminal device to be performed through the third-party network, wherein the group identity information comprises multiple network identities; or second indication information indicating whether the terminal device is allowed to initiate a request for authentication by the third-party network in a case where at least one item in first configuration information broadcast by the cell does not match at least one item in second configuration information maintained by the terminal device; or third indication information indicating whether the terminal device is allowed to access a cell of a third-party network and obtain subscription information; or second group identity information that allows the terminal device to access the cell of the third-party network and obtain the subscription information; or fourth indication information indicating whether a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), a SNPN, access control configuration information, a Closed Access Group (CAG) or a temporary network identity allows emergency communication, and wherein granularity of the SNPN configuration information in the first configuration information is cell granularity, and the granularity of the first indication information, the first group identity information, the second indication information, the third indication information, the second group identity information and the fourth indication information is SNPN granularity. Yang teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following: wherein the first configuration information comprises configuration information corresponding to a third-party network, and the third-party network is a network other than a subscribed network of the terminal device, wherein the first configuration information comprises at least one of the following: Stand-alone Non-public Network (SNPN) configuration information; or first indication information indicating whether authentication of the terminal device is allowed to be performed through a third-party network; or first group identity information that allows the authentication of the terminal device to be performed through the third-party network, wherein the group identity information comprises multiple network identities; or second indication information indicating whether the terminal device is allowed to initiate a request for authentication by the third-party network in a case where at least one item in first configuration information broadcast by the cell does not match at least one item in second configuration information maintained by the terminal device; or third indication information indicating whether the terminal device is allowed to access a cell of a third-party network and obtain subscription information; or second group identity information that allows the terminal device to access the cell of the third-party network and obtain the subscription information; or fourth indication information indicating whether a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), a SNPN, access control configuration information, a Closed Access Group (CAG) or a temporary network identity allows emergency communication, and wherein granularity of the SNPN configuration information in the first configuration information is cell granularity, and the granularity of the first indication information, the first group identity information, the second indication information, the third indication information, the second group identity information and the fourth indication information is SNPN granularity (Yang discloses a system (Fig. 1), where a UE receives from a first network information about a target network, where the received information comprises indicators about registration of the UE into the target network, identifiers for the UE to access the target network, PLMN indicators, SNPN indicators, SNPN granularity, and/or indicators granularity [Paragraphs 152, 248-249, 253, 266, 268-270, 302]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Chami) by implementing granularity (as taught by Yang) for the purpose of processing network sessions (Yang – Paragraph 7). Regarding claim 20, Yang further teaches the network device according to claim 17, wherein the first configuration information comprises an SNPN network identity ([Paragraphs 152, 248-249, 253, 266, 268-270, 302]). Conclusion 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5708. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm. 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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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. February 10, 2026 /FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 26, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604155
ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION CONNECTION AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598540
Configuration Method and Apparatus, and Terminal and Network Side Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593263
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMIC CONTENT HANDLING OF INTER-LAYER MESSAGES IN A POD BASED CLOUD NATIVE ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587452
CONTAINERIZATION OF TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK FUNCTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570238
MULTI-MODAL CONTEXT BASED VEHICLE THEFT PREVENTION
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+56.9%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 569 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