Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/321,522

TECHNIQUES FOR REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION IN USER EQUIPMENT MODEMS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
May 22, 2023
Examiner
DUFFY, JAMES P
Art Unit
2461
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
454 granted / 594 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -8% lift
Without
With
+-7.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
636
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.3%
+16.3% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 594 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 4-25 and 31-35 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 § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 31 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (CN 1322767, Zhou hereafter). RE claim 31, Zhou discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Inherent generic components), configured to: determine that a measurement associated with signal strength satisfies a threshold, wherein, to determine that the measurement satisfies the threshold, the one or more processors are configured to at least one of: transmit, to the network, the indication of the instantaneous SNR associated with the UE and receive, from the network, an indication of the measurement in response to the indication of the instantaneous SNR; and modify a parameter associated with a modem of the UE, based at least in part on the measurement satisfying the threshold, to reduce power consumption (Paragraph 40 discloses a system comprised of at least one terminal and a base station wherein the terminal performs closed loop Transmit Power Control upon direction from the base station. The terminal transmits a measurement report containing a measured signal-to-noise ratio. The base station then determines whether to perform closed-loop power control based on the signal-to-noise ratio in the measurement report and the calculated target signal-to-noise ratio. If conditions are met based on this comparison, the base station issues the command to the terminal to perform TPC.) RE claim 35, Zhou discloses the apparatus of claim 31 as set forth above. Note that Zhou further discloses, wherein, to determine that the measurement satisfies the threshold, the one or more processors are configured to: transmit, to the network, the indication of the instantaneous SNR associated with the UE; and receive, from the network, the indication of the measurement in response to the indication of the instantaneous SNR (Paragraph 40 discloses a system comprised of at least one terminal and a base station wherein the terminal performs closed loop Transmit Power Control upon direction from the base station. The terminal transmits a measurement report containing a measured signal-to-noise ratio. The base station then determines whether to perform closed-loop power control based on the signal-to-noise ratio in the measurement report and the calculated target signal-to-noise ratio. If conditions are met based on this comparison, the base station issues the command to the terminal to perform TPC.) Allowable Subject Matter Claims 32-34 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but may be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: RE claim 32, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest wherein, to determine that the measurement satisfies the threshold, the one or more processors are configured to: estimate the instantaneous SNR using the reference signal; and subtract the SNR requirement from the instantaneous SNR to calculate the measurement. RE claim 33, the claim depends upon claim 32 and thereby incorporates the allowable matter set forth above. RE claim 34, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest wherein, to determine that the measurement satisfies the threshold, the one or more processors are configured to: receive, from the network, the indication of the instantaneous SNR associated with the UE; and subtract the SNR requirement from the instantaneous SNR to calculate the measurement. Claims 1 and 4-25 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: RE claim 1, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest determine that a measurement associated with signal strength satisfies a threshold, the measurement including a spare signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) calculated as a difference between an instantaneous SNR and an SNR requirement; and modify a parameter associated with a modem of the UE, based at least in part on the measurement satisfying the threshold, to reduce power consumption. RE claims 2-13, the claims depend upon claim 1 and thereby incorporate the allowable matter set forth above. RE claim 14, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest a UE configured to transmit an indication that the UE is configured to use spare signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) to reduce power consumption; and modify a parameter associated with a modem of the UE based at least in part on the spare SNR satisfying a threshold. RE claims 15-22, the claims depend upon claim 14 and thereby incorporate the allowable matter set forth above. RE claim 24, prior arts do not explicitly disclose, teach or suggest a network configured to receive an indication that the UE is configured to use spare signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) to reduce power consumption; and transmit at least one parameter associated with using the spare SNR to reduce power consumption. RE claim 25, the claim depends upon claim 24 and thereby incorporates the allowable matter set forth above. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 James P Duffy whose telephone number is (571)270-7516. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST. 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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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. /James P Duffy/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 09, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12581270
MANAGED NETWORK SUPPORTING BACKSCATTERING COMMUNICATION DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563595
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR SYNCHRONIZATION IN A MULTI-AP COORDINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12557141
METHODS, DEVICES AND SYSTEMS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION USING MULTI-LINK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12557142
WI-FI 6E ENHANCEMENT IN CONTENTION-BASED PROTOCOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556992
5G RADIO ACCESS NETWORK LIVE MIGRATION AND SHARING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
76%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (-7.6%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 594 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