Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/272,447

COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION CONTROL PROGRAM, AND COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 14, 2023
Examiner
OH, ANDREW CHUNG SUK
Art Unit
2466
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Konica Minolta Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
379 granted / 547 resolved
+11.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
578
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§103
58.3%
+18.3% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 547 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Other prior art Ji (US-20160338052) [0047] the UE 305 sends an uplink/downlink allocation request message to the BS 300. Upon reception of the allocation request message, at step S320, the BS 300 measures the ratio between uplink traffic and downlink traffic for the UE Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, 23 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 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Independent Claims Claim(s) 1, 18, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501) in further view of Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212). As to claim 1, 8, 23: Jia teaches a communication system comprising: … ; a network system at least a part of which includes wireless communication (fig.1, 104 network device); and a server that performs data transport with the terminal device through the network system via wireless communication (fig.8, 810 [0027, 56, 59] network server devices), wherein the communication system includes a hardware processor that dynamically controls a transport ratio of an uplink channel to a downlink channel, considering a direction from the terminal device to the server is an uplink channel and a direction from the server to the terminal device is a downlink channel ([0003] In New Radio (NR), often referred to as 5G, a standard (3GPP) defines 56 time-division duplex slot formats depending on downlink/uplink (DL/UL) TDD symbol ratios. Dynamic selection of one of the slot formats allows flexible TDD scheduling operations, in that dynamic selection allows the DL/UL ratio to be adjusted based on current traffic needs, e.g., 3:1 downlink to uplink for a while, then 1:1, and so on). Jia may not explicitly teach a terminal device including a sensing device. However, Nino teaches a terminal device including a sensing device (fig.6, claim 27, claim 31, claim 32 – plurality of sensors). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement sensors, taught by Nino, into the UE, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and obtain environmental data. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nino in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Jia may not explicitly teach and the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio in response to a request from the terminal device, wherein one or both of: the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger on reception of a notification of completion of data transmission preparation from the server; and the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger after completion of reception of data transmitted from the server. However, Zarifi teaches and the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio in response to a request from the terminal device ([0051, 69, 74, 78-80, 87] UE requests a subframe configuration from a negotiating center; [0080-82] UE uses the new subframe configuration), wherein one or both of: the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger on reception of a notification of completion of data transmission preparation from the server ([0027, 69, 87] the present disclosure also provide for changes in the time slot configurations of an individual UE as the UE's traffic load, traffic type or inter-UE communication status changes); and the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger after completion of reception of data transmitted from the server ([0027, 69, 87] changes in traffic state lead to configuration changes). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement UE requests and UL-DL configuration changes, taught by Zarifi, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and manage resources efficiently. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Zarifi and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Dependent Claims Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, 13, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212) in further view of Hu (US-20140334352). As to claim 2, 19: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1, 18. Although Jia teaches adjusting the UL/DL ratio, Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger when an amount of data from the terminal device to the server is larger than an amount of data from the server to the terminal device. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger when an amount of data from the terminal device to the server is larger than an amount of data from the server to the terminal device ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. As to claim 3, 20: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1, 18 Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger when an amount of data from the server to the terminal device is larger than an amount of data from the terminal device to the server. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger when an amount of data from the server to the terminal device is larger than an amount of data from the terminal device to the server ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. As to claim 12: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1. Although Jia teaches server nodes, Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the server generates a control program and/or logical data for operating the terminal device and transmits the control program and/or the logical data to the terminal device. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the server generates a control program and/or logical data for operating the terminal device and transmits the control program and/or the logical data to the terminal device ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment). . Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. As to claim 13: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 12. Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger during transmission of the control program and/or the logical data. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger during transmission of the control program and/or the logical data ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment). . Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Hu (US-20140334352) in further view of Nagaraju (US-20200012966). As to claim 14: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 13. Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the control program and/or the logical data includes a machine learning algorithm used in the terminal device. However, Nagaraju teaches wherein the control program and/or the logical data includes a machine learning algorithm used in the terminal device ([0023, 34, 118]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement updates through a server, taught by Nagaraju, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and improve functionality and adapt to environmental conditions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nagaraju and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212) in view of Siegel (US-9086941). As to claim 15: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 12. Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the server notifies the terminal device that transmission preparation of the control program and/or the logical data is completed. However, Siegel teaches wherein the server notifies the terminal device that transmission preparation of the control program and/or the logical data is completed (9:20-32 PUSH notification that update is available). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement indication of ready data, taught by Siegel, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and enable a user to prepare for download. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Siegel in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212) in further view of Nagaraju (US-20200012966). As to claim 16: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1. Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device and/or the server learns using data obtained by the sensing device and changes a function of the terminal device. However, Nagaraju teaches wherein the terminal device and/or the server learns using data obtained by the sensing device and changes a function of the terminal device ([0004, 34] As a result, the edge devices 12 can learn from their edge data (with the assistance of the server computer system 14) to improve their respective local models 18, to make better predictions used to perform local actions). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement updates through sensor data, taught by Nagaraju, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and improve functionality and adapt to environmental conditions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nagaraju and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501) in view of Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212). As to claim 17: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1. Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device includes a plurality of the sensing devices. However, Nino teaches wherein the terminal device includes a plurality of the sensing devices (fig.6, claim 27, claim 31, claim 32 – plurality of sensors). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement plurality of sensors, taught by Nino, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and obtain more accurate environmental data with which to make decisions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nino and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references. 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 ANDREW CHUNG SUK OH whose telephone number is (571)270-5273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12p-8p. 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 5712727969. 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. /ANDREW C OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 14, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 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 12587338
DEMODULATION REFERENCE SIGNAL ENHANCEMENTS FOR CONTROL CHANNEL REPETITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12561571
CHANNEL FEATURE EXTRACTION VIA MODEL-BASED NEURAL NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556248
METHODS FOR PROVIDING LOWER-LAYER SPLIT FULL SPATIAL SAMPLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556236
INFORMATION FEEDBACK METHOD, DEVICE AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550150
DYNAMIC SPECTRUM SHARING PHYSICAL DOWNLINK CONTROL CHANNEL ENHANCEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
69%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+13.2%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 547 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