Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/270,068

LIMITED CAPABILITY ZONES FOR WIRELESS DEVICES

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 28, 2023
Examiner
HUYNH, CHUCK
Art Unit
2644
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
2 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
345 granted / 482 resolved
+9.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
511
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.8%
+18.8% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 482 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Amendment The amendment made dated does not contain any new matter, and has been accepted. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Due to the broadness of the claim language, Gong still discloses the newly amended limitation of receiving an indication from a network node on the communications network of information associated with a limited capability zone (Gong: [0108], [0109]: geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations; [0310]; [0186]: receiving alerts from Air Control System ([0161], [0162]) that the UAV will be in restricted zone). Therefore, the claims are still not yet in condition for allowance and are still rejected as shown below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5, and 8-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gong et al. (US 2016/0292696; hereinafter Gong). Regarding claim 1, Gong discloses a method of operating a communication device in a communications network, the method comprising: receiving an indication from a network node on the communications network of information associated with a limited capability zone ([0108], [0109]: geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations; [0310]; [0186]: receiving alerts from Air Control System ([0161], [0162]) that the UAV will be in restricted zone); and limiting operation of the communication device based on the information and location of the communication device relative to the limited capability zone ([0108], [0109]: geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations based on location and authorization: [0121], [0146]; [0154]: flight regulations can comprise various limitations such as time limit to be in a location, maximum speed in a location, type of data to be collected etc.). Regarding claim 2, Gong discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the limited capability zone comprises a no-fly zone, and wherein receiving the indication the information comprises receiving the indication a geographical area and restrictions associated with flight by communication devices within the geographical area ([0173]: flight restriction zone where UAV may not fly). Regarding claim 3, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1,wherein the limited capability zone comprises a no-transmission zone, and wherein receiving the indication the information comprises receiving an indication of a geographical area and restrictions associated with transmissions by communication devices within the geographical area ([0220]: the restriction of transmitting recording images from the UAV in particular locations). Regarding claim 4, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1,wherein receiving the indication of the information comprises receiving the indication the information as part of a subscription between the communication device and an operator of the communications network ([0027]: UAV and controller being a part of the authorized users to operate the UAV). Regarding claim 8, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 6, wherein receiving the indication the information associated with the limited capability zone further comprises: determining a condition associated with the communication device; and transmitting an indication of the condition associated with the communication device to the network node, and receiving the indication of the information in the dedicated signaling in response to transmitting the indication of the condition associated with the communication device to the network node ([0007], [0108], [0109]: communication with UAV about geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations). Regarding claims 9 and 38, Gong discloses wherein determining the condition associated with the communication device comprises determining at least one of: a type of the communication device ([0163]: device type); a specific action being performed by the communication device ([0122]-[0123]: operations performed by UAV); and a current location of the communication device ([0123]: GPS sensor for location monitoring), wherein transmitting the indication of the information comprises transmitting the indication of the information in response to the condition associated with the communication device ([0007], [0108], [0109]: communication with UAV about geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations). Regarding claim 10, Gong discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein receiving the indication of the information from the network node comprises receiving the indication of the information in broadcast signaling ([0271]: broadcast communication). Regarding claim 11, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1, the method further comprising: determining whether the limited capability zone is active, wherein limiting the operation of the communication device based on the information comprises limiting the operation of the communication device based on determining that the limited capability zone is active ([0867]: geo-fencing regulation might change over time, some condition might be active then inactive giving way to new regulations). Regarding claim 12, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1, the method further comprising: determining a pattern of subframes to be used by the communication device while the communication device is within the limited capability zone, and wherein limiting the operation of the communication device comprises communicating using the pattern of subframes while the communication device is within the limited capability zone ([0007], [0108], [0109]: communication with UAV about geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations). Regarding claim 13, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1,wherein receiving the indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone comprises receiving an indication of movements permitted by the communication device while the communication device is within the limited capability zone, and wherein limiting the operation of the communication device comprises limiting movement of the communication device to the movements permitted by the communication device while the communication device is within the limited capability zone ([0750], [0174]: flight regulation governs movement of UAV). Regarding claim 14, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 1,wherein receiving the indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone comprises receiving an indication of whether the communication device is permitted to enter or perform an action within the limited capability zone, and wherein limiting the operation of the communication device comprises limiting entrance or performance of the action of the communication device based on whether the communication device is permitted to enter or perform the action within the limited capability zone ([0750]: UAV restrictions within the geo-fence location; [0027]: UAV and controller being a part of the authorized users to operate the UAV). Regarding claim 15, Gong discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein receiving the indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone comprises receiving an indication of transmissions permitted by the communication device while the communication device is within the limited capability zone, and wherein limiting the operation of the communication device comprises limiting transmissions of the communication device based on the indication of transmission permitted by the communication device while the communication device is within the limited capability zone ([0750]: UAV restrictions within the geo-fence location; [0027]: UAV and controller being a part of the authorized users to operate the UAV). Regarding claim 16, Gong discloses a method of operating a network node in a communications network, the method comprising: determining information associated with a limited capability zone ([0108], [0109]: geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations; [0310]); and transmitting an indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone to a communication device in the communications network ([0007], [0108], [0109]: communication with UAV about geo-fencing boundaries to apply restrictions to UAV operations). Regarding claim 17, Gong discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein the limited capability zone comprises a no-fly zone, and wherein determining the information comprises determining an indication of a geographical area and restrictions associated with flight by communication devices within the geographical area ([0173]: flight restriction zone where UAV may not fly). Regarding claim 18, Gong discloses the method of any of Claim 16,wherein the limited capability zone comprises a no-transmission zone, and wherein determining the information comprises determining an indication of a geographical area and restrictions associated with transmissions by communication devices within the geographical area ([0220]: the restriction of transmitting recording images from the UAV in particular locations). 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. Claim(s) 6, 7, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gong in view of Shimoda et al. (US 2020/0214073; hereinafter Shimoda). Regarding claims 6 and 19, Gong discloses all the particulars of the claim except for wherein receiving the indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone from the network node comprises receiving the indication of the information in dedicated signaling. However, Shimoda does disclose the limitation of wherein receiving the indication of the information associated with the limited capability zone from the network node comprises receiving the indication of the information in dedicated signaling ([0463]: use of RRC and dedicated signaling is used to communicate to the UAV). It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Shimoda’s disclosure to provide more effective communication. Regarding claims 7 and 20, Gong discloses all the particulars of the claims except for wherein receiving the indication of the information in dedicated signaling comprises receiving the indication of the information in a radio resource control message. However, Shimoda does disclose the limitation of wherein receiving the indication of the information in dedicated signaling comprises receiving the indication of the information in a radio resource control message ([0463]: use of RRC and dedicated signaling is used to communicate to the UAV). It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Shimoda’s disclosure to provide more effective communication. 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 CHUCK HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-7866. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am - 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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-270-5371. 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. /CHUCK HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 26, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604159
PROVIDING, ORGANIZING, AND MANAGING LOCATION HISTORY RECORDS OF A MOBILE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603746
METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION, AND COMMUNICATION NODE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598559
PREDICTIVE BACK-OFF REPORTING IN TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598547
Support for L2TP Tunneling
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598539
METHOD FOR DETERMINING TRANSMISSION OF CIOT USER DATA IN RELATION TO S-NSSAI
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
72%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+14.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 482 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