Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/379,637

Method And Apparatus For Supporting An Advanced Mobile Communication System With Enhanced Channel Designs

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Oct 12, 2023
Examiner
LO, DIANE LEE
Art Unit
2466
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
MediaTek Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
842 granted / 941 resolved
+31.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
966
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
§112
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 941 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION This is response to Application 18/379,637 filed on 10/12/2023 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Examiner contacted Applicant on February 26, 2026 about a restriction and Applicant elected claims 1-6 and 13-16 for further examination. Election/Restrictions Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121: I. Claims 1-6 and 13-16, drawn to a method for PBCH transmission with a certain number of resource blocks II. Claims 7-12 and 17-20, drawn to method for PDCCH transmission with resource blocks for a control resource set The inventions are distinct, each from the other because of the following reasons: 2. Inventions I and II are directed to related processes. The related inventions are distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed are either not capable of use together or can have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions do not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed are not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j). In the instant case, the inventions as claimed Invention I is directed to methods for PBCH transmission with a certain number of resource blocks while Invention II is directed to PDCCH transmission with resource blocks for a control resource set. Furthermore, the inventions as claimed do not encompass overlapping subject matter and there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants. 3. The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined. In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01. 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)(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. Claims 1-6 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Si et al. (US 2024/0146457 A1). 1. Regarding claim 1, Si teaches a method, comprising: selecting, by a processor of an apparatus, a first number (N) of resource blocks (RBs) from a second number (X) of RBs on a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) in an event that the apparatus is operating in a frequency band with a transmission bandwidth less than a threshold (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz); and performing, by the processor, a PBCH transmission to a user equipment (UE) based on the first number of RBs (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 2. Regarding claim 2, Si teaches, further comprising: puncturing, by the processor, a third number (Y) of RBs for the PBCH transmission, wherein Y = X – N (Fig. 5A and 5B X=8; 20-12). 3. Regarding claim 3, Si teaches, wherein the third number of RBs comprise first Y/2 RBs and last Y/2 RBs in the second number of RBs (Fig. 5A and 5B block structure with 12 RBs). 4. Regarding claim 4, Si teaches, wherein the PBCH transmission comprises a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS), and the PSS and the SSS are not punctured (Fig. 5A and 5B block structure with 12 RBs). 5. Regarding claim 5, Si teaches, wherein the second number of RBs comprise 20 RBs and the threshold is 5 mega-hertz (MHz) (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 6. Regarding claim 6, Si teaches, wherein the first number of RBs comprise 12 RBs and the transmission bandwidth is 3 MHz (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 7. Regarding claim 13, Si teaches a method, comprising: detecting, by a processor of an apparatus, a synchronization raster point associated with a cell of a transmission bandwidth on a frequency band (Paragraphs [0181] to [0187] synchronization raster entries); determining, by the processor, a first number of resource blocks (RBs) for a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) in an event that the transmission bandwidth of the frequency band is less than a threshold (Fig. 5A and 5B Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz); and performing, by the processor, a PBCH reception from a base station (BS) based on the first number of RBs (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 8. Regarding claim 14, Si teaches, wherein the first number of RBs comprise 12 RBs and the transmission bandwidth is 3 mega-hertz (MHz) (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 9. Regarding claim 15, Si teaches further comprising: determining, by the processor, a second number of RBs for the PBCH in an event that the transmission bandwidth of the frequency band is greater than or equal to the threshold; and performing, by the processor, the PBCH reception from the BS based on the second number of RBs (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz; 20 RBs). 10. Regarding claim 16, Si teaches, wherein the second number of RBs comprise 20 RBs and the threshold is 5 mega-hertz (MHz) (Paragraphs [0067] and [0069] 3 MHz channel bandwidth smaller than 5 MHz; 20 RBs). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Lee et al. (US 2015/0071203 A1) Paragraph [0193] Liu et al. (US 2022/0248474 A1) Paragraph [0117] Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIANE LEE LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm. 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 (571)272-7969. 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. /DIANE L LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 12, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598517
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593343
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING SIDELINK RESOURCE REQUIRED FOR SIDELINK DRX OPERATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592797
WAKE-UP SIGNAL WAVEFORM DESIGN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587872
USING ORCHESTRATORS FOR FALSE POSITIVE DETECTION AND ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580710
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RESOURCE ALLOCATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+8.5%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 941 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