Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/245,208

MONITORING PERIODIC REFERENCE SIGNALS FOR MULTIPLE CONSECUTIVE OCCURRENCES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 14, 2023
Examiner
FANG, PAKEE
Art Unit
2409
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
LENOVO (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
358 granted / 532 resolved
+9.3% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
567
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
59.2%
+19.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 532 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment The amendment filed on 11/24/2025 has been entered and considered by Examiner. Claims 1 - 20 are presented for examination. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/24/2025 has been entered. 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 7-10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 20200136895 A1) in view of Belleschi et al. (US Pub. 20200177318 A1). For claims 1 and 12, Venugopal discloses a method of a device (the method of paragraphs [0086]-[0095] and figure 6), the method comprising: detecting, for reception of a periodic downlink reference signal from at least a first beam [0086-87], multiple occurrences of: an interference level being greater than an interference level threshold (paragraph [0087], "At 610, the UE 604 fails to detect a periodic reference signal transmitted on at least one of the beams in the first set of DL transmit beams 606, and/or detects that a quality metric (e.g., RSRP) associated with the reference signal has fallen below a signal quality threshold (represented in FIG. 6 as "Qout" and paragraph [0088], "At 615, the UE 604 again fails to detect; the periodic reference signal transmitted on the at least one of the beams in the first set of DL transmit beams 606, and/or again detects that the quality metric associated with the reference signal has fallen below the Qout threshold'); a listen-before-talk failure (detecting signals before session establishment) [0069]; or both; determining whether the multiple occurrences is greater than a threshold (paragraph [0088], "Because the BF/ count has reached the maximum count ("MaxCnt'') threshold while the BFD timer is running,"); and in response to the multiple occurrences being greater than the threshold [0088]: monitoring to receive the periodic downlink reference signal from a second beam (paragraph [0089], "More specifically, the controller/processor 359 of the UE 604 requests that the Layer 1 functionality of the UE 604 (implemented by the RX processor 356) identify at least one beam in a second set ("seLq1'') of DL transmit beams 608 that carries a periodic reference signal with a received signal strength greater than a signal quality threshold (represented as "Qin''). The second set of DL transmit beams 608 may correspond to one or more of beams 502a-h in FIG. 5 in the mmW frequency range. The second set of DL transmit beams 608 is referred to as the "candidate beam reference signal list." The UE 604 may receive both the beam IDs of the beams in the second set of DL transmit beams 608 and the Qin threshold from the base station 602. In the example of FIG. 6, the second set of DL transmit beams 608 includes four beams, one of which (shaded) carries periodic reference signals having a received signal strength greater than the Qin threshold'); or terminating the monitoring for the reception of the downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for a time period (paragraph [0089] because the at least a first beam is no longer monitored); or both [0089]. But Venugopal doesn’t explicitly discloses multiple consecutive occurrences. However, Belleschi discloses detecting, for reception of a periodic downlink reference signal (LBT signal) from at least a first beam, multiple consecutive occurrences [0129, 0023]. Since, all are analogous arts addressing data detection used in a mobile system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Venugopal with Belleschi to ensure proper detection of downlink signals in order to improve data reception. Claim 12 differs from claim 1 only by the additional recitation of the following limitation, which is also taught by the cited prior art. The cited prior art Venugopal further discloses an apparatus comprising: a processor [0064]; and a memory coupled to the processor [0064], the memory comprising instructions executable by the processor [0063-65]. All other identical limitations are rejected based on the same rationale as shown above. For claims 2 and 13, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses receiving periodic downlink reference signal resource configuration information to indicate at least two beams and a switching pattern for the indicated beams before detecting the multiple occurrences [0089-90]. For claims 3 and 14, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses in response to the multiple occurrences being greater than the threshold, monitoring to receive the periodic downlink reference signal from the second beam, terminating the monitoring for the reception of the downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for the time period, or both without receiving additional configuration information [0086-89]. For claim 7, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses the threshold corresponds to a single periodic reference signal resource or a single beam [0088]. For claim 8, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses the threshold corresponds to all periodic reference signal resources, all beams, or both [0088]. For claim 9, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal on at least the first beam comprises reception of the periodic downlink reference signal on a plurality of beams, and reception on the plurality of beams is offset in time from each other (paragraph [0087]) reception of the downlink reference signal on a plurality of beams. Furthermore, the transmitting device performs a beam sweep (see paragraph [0086], "The first set of DL transmit beams 606 may correspond to one or more of beams 502a-h in FIG. 5 in the mmW frequency range." and paragraph [0078], "Referring to FIG. 5, the base station 502 may transmit a beamformed signal to the UE 504 on one or more beams 502a, 502b, 502c, 502d, 502e, 502f, 502g, 502h, each having a beam identifier that can be used by the UE 504 to identify the respective beam. Where the base station is beamforming towards the UE 504 with a single array of antennas, the base station 502 may perform a "beam sweep" by transmitting first beam 502a, then beam 502b, and so on until lastly transmitting beam 502h."). For claim 10, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses terminating the monitoring for the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for the time period comprises terminating the monitoring for the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for the time period without receiving an indication [0087-89]. Claims 11, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 20200136895 A1) in view of Belleschi et al. (US Pub. 20200177318 A1) in view of Chendamarai et al. (US 20180242232 A1). For claim 11, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses terminating the monitoring for the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for the time period comprises receiving an indication [0087-89], and But Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, doesn’t explicitly discloses the indication indicates that the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal from at least the first beam is inhibited for the time period. However, Chendamarai discloses the indication indicates that the reception of the periodic downlink reference signal from at least the first beam is inhibited for the time period [0097]-[0102]. Since, all are analogous arts addressing transmission beams used in a mobile communication system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, with Chendamarai to enhance communication capabilities, thus, improving network efficiency. For claim 15, Venugopal discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one memory [0063-65]; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus [0063-65] to: detect, for transmission of a downlink reference signal from at least a first beam [0086-87], multiple occurrences of: an interference level being greater than an interference level threshold (paragraph [0087], "At 610, the UE 604 fails to detect a periodic reference signal transmitted on at least one of the beams in the first set of DL transmit beams 606, and/or detects that a quality metric (e.g., RSRP) associated with the reference signal has fallen below a signal quality threshold (represented in FIG. 6 as "Qout" and paragraph [0088], "At 615, the UE 604 again fails to detect; the periodic reference signal transmitted on the at least one of the beams in the first set of DL transmit beams 606, and/or again detects that the quality metric associated with the reference signal has fallen below the Qout threshold'); or a listen-before-talk failure (detecting signals before session establishment) [0069]; or both; and determine whether the multiple occurrences is greater than a threshold (paragraph [0088], "Because the BF/ count has reached the maximum count ("MaxCnt'') threshold while the BFD timer is running,"); and But Venugopal doesn’t explicitly discloses multiple consecutive occurrences. However, Belleschi discloses detecting, for reception of a periodic downlink reference signal (LBT signal) from at least a first beam, multiple consecutive occurrences [0129, 0023]. Since, all are analogous arts addressing data detection used in a mobile system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Venugopal with Belleschi to ensure proper detection of downlink signals in order to improve data reception. But Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, doesn’t explicitly discloses in response to the multiple occurrences being greater than the threshold: transmit the downlink reference signal from a second beam; inhibit transmission of the downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for a time period; or both. However, Chendamarai discloses in response to the multiple occurrences being greater than the threshold [0100]-[0101]: transmit the downlink reference signal from a second beam (paragraph [0101], "instead a second LBT procedure may be performed in a subsequent window (e.g., interval 820-b) allocated for single-beam DRS. The second LBT procedure may be performed in the same direction as single-beam DRS 810 or in a different direction.") [0101-102]; inhibit transmission of the downlink reference signal from at least the first beam for a time period (paragraph [0101], "instead a second LBT procedure mav be performed in a subsequent window (e.g., interval 820-b) allocated for single- beam DRS. The second LBT procedure may be performed in the same direction as single-beam DRS 810 or in a different direction."; emphasis added by the examiner. because the second LBT procedure is performed in a subsequent window, the downlink reference signal from the at least the first beam is not transmitted for a time period which is at least the current window); or both [0101]. Chendamarai also discloses detect, for transmission of a downlink reference signal from at least a first beam [0097]-[0102], multiple occurrences of: an interference level being greater than an interference level threshold [0100]-[0101]; or a listen-before-talk failure (paragraphs [0100]-[0101],"In some cases, the base station may perform another LBT procedure within interval 820-a if a first LBT procedure fails. Upon a successful LBT, the base station 105 may transmit single-beam DRS 810-b indicating a RACH opportunity 815-b. For example, single-beam DRS 810 may be staggered across time, subject to LBT, such that multiple directions may be spanned as the LBT associated with each direction succeeds over time. In some cases, the base station may perform another LBT procedure within interval 820-a if a first LBT procedure fails. Upon a successful LBT, the base station 105 may transmit single-beam DRS 810-b indicating a RACH opportunity 815-b. For example, single-beam DRS 810 may be staggered across time, subject to LBT, such that multiple directions may be spanned as the LBT associated with each direction succeeds over time. If the LBT procedure fails in the given direction, the single-beam DRS 810 mav not be transmitted and instead a second LBT procedure mav be performed in a subsequent window (e.g., interval 820-b) allocated for single-beam DRS. The second LBT procedure may be performed in the same direction as single-beam DRS 810 or in a different direction. For instance, multiple time windows may correspond to respective single-beam DRS directions. As such, DRS in one direction may only be transmitted within a given interval 820. Alternatively, multiple directions may be supported for a given interval 820."; emphasis added by the examiner; it is noted that paragraphs [0100]-[0101] disclose two LBT procedures that fail, said LBT procedures having the same beam). Since, all are analogous arts addressing transmission beams used in a mobile communication system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, with Chendamarai to enhance communication capabilities, thus, improving network efficiency. For claim 16, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, discloses the transmission of the downlink reference signal from at least the first beam comprises transmission of the downlink reference signal from the first beam using a single periodic reference signal resource [0086-88]. For claim 17, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, Chendamarai further discloses the at least one processor tis configured o cause the apparatus to transmit configuration information to a user equipment to indicate a switching pattern for a spatial filter configuration before detecting the multiple occurrences [0067]. See motivation to combine the reference from the above. For claim 18, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, Chendamarai further discloses in response to the multiple occurrences being greater than the threshold, the downlink reference signal is transmitted from the second beam, the downlink reference signal is inhibited from being transmitted from at least the first beam for the time period, or both without transmitting additional configuration information to a user equipment [0100-102]. See motivation to combine the reference from the above. For claim 19, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, discloses the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to increment a counter to track the multiple occurrences [0086-88]. Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 20200136895 A1) in view of Belleschi et al. (US Pub. 20200177318 A1) in further view of Jeon et al. (US 20180324716 A1). For claim 4, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, discloses incrementing a counter to track the multiple occurrences [0086-88], But Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi, doesn’t explicitly discloses wherein incrementing the counter comprises incrementing a separate counter for each periodic reference signal resource, for each beam, incrementing a single counter for the periodic reference signal resource set, or both. However, Jeon discloses wherein incrementing the counter comprises incrementing a separate counter for each periodic reference signal resource, for each beam, incrementing a single counter for the periodic reference signal resource set, or both [0315]. Since, all are analogous arts addressing transmission beams used in a mobile communication system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi with Jeon to enhance event tracking capabilities, thus, improving network optimization. For claim 5, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Jeon, Jeon further discloses resetting the separate counter in response to proper transmission on a corresponding periodic reference signal resource, a corresponding beam, or both [0315]. For claim 6, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Jeon, Jeon further discloses resetting the separate counter in response to the separate counter reaching the threshold and a resulting action being performed [0333]. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 20200136895 A1) in view of Belleschi et al. (US Pub. 20200177318 A1) in further view of Chendamarai et al. (US 20180242232 A1) in further view of Jeon et al. (US 20180324716 A1). For claim 20, Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, discloses all limitations this claim depended on. But Venugopal, as modified by Belleschi and Chendamarai, doesn’t explicilty discloses the following limitation taught by Jeon. Jeon discloses the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to increment a separate counter for each periodic reference signal resource, for each beam, or both [0315]. Since, all are analogous arts addressing transmission beams used in a mobile communication system; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Venugopal, Belleschi, and Chendamarai with Jeon to enhance event tracking capabilities, thus, improving network optimization. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. In view of amendment, a new reference has been used for new ground of rejections. Inquiries Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to PAKEE FANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3633. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00AM-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, Armouche, Hadi can be reached on 571-270-3618. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /PAKEE FANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2023
Application Filed
May 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 19, 2025
Interview Requested
Jul 02, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 12, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 28, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 06, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592992
Incoming Call Reminder System and Method and Electronic Device Utilizing vibration or ringing reminder
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587830
AUTHORIZED VOICE COMMAND OVERRIDE FOR WIRELESS DEVICE DATA CAPABILITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574463
MANAGING A CHARGING OPERATION IN A COMMUNICATION NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574992
COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD AND USER EQUIPMENT UTILIZING AN INACTIVITY TIMER FOR MULTICAST BROADCAST SERVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12561619
TRAINING ENSEMBLE PREDICTOR MACHINE LEARNING MODELS WITH AGGREGATED CLASSES RANKED BY PREDICTIONS AND CONFIDENCES UTILIZING PLURALITY OF TRAINING DATA ITEMS
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
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+36.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 532 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