Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/368,570

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 15, 2023
Examiner
CARDONE, JASON D
Art Unit
2458
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Bunker Hill Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
28 granted / 31 resolved
+32.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -23% lift
Without
With
+-23.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
59.6%
+19.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 09/28/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CHINA 202211192219.7 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the term “discloser”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01. 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. Claims 1-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebire et al. (“Sebire”) [PGPUB 2024/0056802] in view of Wu et al. (“Wu”) [PGPUB 2022/0303862]. Regarding claim 1, the Sebire reference discloses a first node for wireless communications, comprising: a first transmitter, transmitting a first Medium Access Control (MAC) Protocol Data Unit (PDU), the first MAC PDU comprising a first MAC header and a first MAC subPDU, the first MAC subPDU comprising a first MAC subheader and a first MAC Service Data Unit (SDU), the first MAC SDU comprising a first Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) PDU [Sebire; figures 2 and 3; paragraphs 0043, 0048, 0050, and 0055]; wherein a target parameter is used for security algorithm of the first PDCP PDU [ie. PDCP SDU (“target parameter) to deliver ciphered PDUs (“used for security algorithm”); Sebire; figure 3; para 0040, 0043, and 0055]; a header of the first PDCP PDU indicates an identity of a first key, the first key being used for the security algorithm of the first PDCP PDU [ie. key; Sebire; para 0071-0073]. The Sebire reference does not specifically disclose the first PDCP PDU being a PDCP PDU of a unicast sidelink radio bearer (RB), whether the target parameter is a logical channel identity (LCID) is related to whether the first node is a generator of the first PDCP PDU, when the first node is the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the target parameter is a LCID, and when the first node is not the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the target parameter is not a LCID. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Wu reference discloses a first PDCP PDU being a PDCP PDU of a unicast sidelink radio bearer (RB) [Wu; para 0042, 0050, 0069, 0094, and 0184], whether the target parameter is a logical channel identity (LCID) is related to whether the first node is a generator of the first PDCP PDU [ie. using LCID, if first remote node is “first node” or using bearer id, if the relay node (“not generator”); Wu; fig 5 and 12; para 0061, 0070, 0074-0075 and 0088], when the first node is the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the target parameter is a LCID [ie. if the first/source remote node is the first node generating the PDCP PDU (“LCID”); Wu; para 0083, 0085, and 0088], and when the first node is not the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the target parameter is not a LCID [using bearer id, if the relay node (“not generator”) is the first node; Wu; fig 5 and 12; para 0070-0071, 0074-0075 and 0088]. The Sebire and Wu references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage LTE systems with PDCP. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of LCID, taught by Wu, into the system, taught by Sebire. The motivation for doing so would have been to identify hop paths easier for a UE relay [WU; para 0041]. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses a first receiver, receiving a second MAC PDU before the action of transmitting a first MAC PDU, the second MAC PDU for generating the first MAC PDU [ie. first PDU sent from source UE; Sebire; para 0069 and 0082] [ie. to UE relay; Wu; para 0041 and 0050-0051]; wherein the second MAC PDU comprises a second MAC header and a second MAC subPDU, the second MAC subPDU comprising a second MAC subheader and a second MAC SDU, the second MAC SDU comprising the first PDCP PDU; the generator of the first PDCP PDU is a node other than the first node [Sebire; figures 2 and 3; paragraphs 0043, 0048, 0050, and 0055]. Regarding claim 3, the Sebire reference discloses multiple MAC PDU headers [Sebire; fig 5; para 0009] but does not specifically disclose the second MAC header comprises a first field and a second field, where the first field in the second MAC header indicates the generator of the first PDCP PDU, while the second field in the second MAC header indicates the first node; the first MAC header comprises a first field and a second field, where the first field comprised by the first MAC header indicates the first node, while the second field comprised by the first MAC header indicates a receiver of the first MAC PDU. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Wu reference discloses the second MAC header comprises a first field and a second field, where the first field in the second MAC header indicates the generator of the first PDCP PDU, while the second field in the second MAC header indicates the first node; the first MAC header comprises a first field and a second field, where the first field comprised by the first MAC header indicates the first node, while the second field comprised by the first MAC header indicates a receiver of the first MAC PDU [Wu; para 0059 and 0063-0066]. The Sebire and Wu references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage LTE systems with PDCP. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of addresses in fields of a MAC header, taught by Wu, into the system, taught by Sebire. The motivation for doing so would have been to useful routing information to the destination remote UE [WU; para 0068]. Regarding claims 4-6, the Sebire reference does not specifically disclose first MAC SDU comprises a PDU of a first protocol layer, the first protocol layer being a protocol layer between an RLC layer and a PDCP layer, with a header of the PDU of the first protocol layer comprising the target parameter; wherein the generator of the first PDCP PDU is a node other than the first node. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Wu reference discloses first MAC SDU comprises a PDU of a first protocol layer, the first protocol layer being a protocol layer between an RLC layer and a PDCP layer, with a header of the PDU of the first protocol layer comprising the target parameter; wherein the generator of the first PDCP PDU is a node other than the first node [ie. adaptation layer; Wu; fig 3; para 0046, 0059, and 0063-0066]. The Sebire and Wu references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage LTE systems with PDCP. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of a layer between RLC and PDCP, taught by Wu, into the system, taught by Sebire. The motivation for doing so would have been to useful routing information to the destination remote UE, through adaptation layer [WU; para 0068]. Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses the target parameter is a peer-to-peer identity or identifier; wherein the first node is not a generator of the first PDCP PDU [Sebire; para 0050] [ie. LCID; Wu; para 0041]. Regarding claims 8-10, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses the target parameter is a BEARER ID [Sebire; para 0050] [ie. LCID; Wu; para 0042, 0051, and 0075]. Regarding claims 11-13, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses the target parameter is an identity of a radio bearer between the generator of the first PDCP PDU and a receiver of the first MAC PDU [Sebire; para 0050] [ie. LCID; Wu; para 0042, 0051, and 0075]. Regarding claims 16-18, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses the first node is not the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the first node is a L2 U2U (i.e., UE to UE) relay node [Sebire; para 0043, 0071, and 0084] [Wu; fig 3; para 0026-0027]. Regarding claim 19, the combination of Sebire-Wu further discloses the first node is the generator of the first PDCP PDU, the first node is not a L2 U2U relay node; the first node is a remote UE [ie. UE; Sebire; para 0070-0071] [Wu; fig 3-4; para 0045-0046]. Regarding claim 20, the method of claim 20 performs the similar steps as the apparatus of claim 1. The combination of Sebire-Wu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as referenced above. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, by the teachings of Sebire-Wu. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebire-Wu, as applied to claims 8 and 11 above, and further in view of Kim [PGPUB 2023/0232490]. Regarding claims 14 and 15, the combination of Sebire-Wu further disclose bearer identification [Sebire; para 0050] [ie. LCID; Wu; para 0042, 0051, and 0075] but does not specifically disclose bits of the target parameter are as inputs of parameters of the security algorithm from BEARER[O] to BEARER[4]. The instant specification does not describe any specific structure or function with the setup of these BEARER bits. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Kim reference discloses bits of the target parameter are as inputs of parameters of the security algorithm from BEARER[O] to BEARER[4] [ie. bearer set; Kim; fig 2H; para 0182 , 0189, and 0204-0205]. The Sebire-Wu and Kim references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage LTE systems with PDCP. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Bearer ids, taught by Kim, into the system, taught by Sebire-Wu. The motivation for doing so would have been to the base station (destination node) to quickly recognize a MAC PDU [Kim; para 0204]. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hong et al. [USPAT 12,495,302] describes L3 U2N relay with a session key. Bergstrom et al. [PGPUB 2024/0323689] describes Backhaul Adaptation Protocol for PDU security within a relay (donor) system. Zhao et al. [PGPUB 2023/0038833] describes sidelink radio bearer (SLRB) with logical channel ids (LCID). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON D CARDONE whose telephone number is (571)272-3933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-4pmEST. 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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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. /JASON D CARDONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603696
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE OF REDUCING INFLUENCE OF AN INTERFERENCE SIGNAL ON A RADIO SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587864
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR OPERATING VEHICLES USING DECENTRALIZED COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580834
CONVEYOR CONTROLLER WITH SIDEBAND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574302
CONTROL OF CLOSED NETWORK USING NETWORK SLICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574822
METHOD FOR DETERMINING MEC ACCESS POINT AND APPARATUS
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (-23.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 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