Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/380,459

METHOD FOR TRANSMIT POWER ADJUSTMENT IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORK

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 16, 2023
Examiner
BEAMER, TEMICA M
Art Unit
2646
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Rohde & Schwarz GmbH & Co. Kg
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
884 granted / 1003 resolved
+26.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1026
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§103
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§102
39.4%
-0.6% vs TC avg
§112
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1003 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages2-5, filed November 13, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kumar et al. U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0132806 in view of Fang et al. U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2023/0239699. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (Kumar), U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0132806 in view of Fang et al. (Fang), U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2023/0239699. Regarding claims 1 and 12, Kumar discloses a method and system for transmit power adjustment in a wireless communication network which comprises a plurality of radio access entities, the method comprising the steps of: obtaining, for one radio access entity of the plurality of radio access entities: information on received signal strengths of a first wireless test signal which is transmitted from at least some radio access entities of the plurality of radio access entities and received by the one radio access entity (the spatial RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 received from neighboring radio nodes 110, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of radio node 110-1 as a function of time at neighboring radio nodes 110. For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045); analyzing the obtained information; and adjusting a signal transmit power of the one radio access entity on the basis of said analysis (Thus, the communication technique may allow radio nodes 110 to dynamically adjust their transmit powers in a coordinated, yet independent manner (i.e., on a small cell-by-small cell basis) using local information in small-cell network 108. Notably, the communication technique may provide situational awareness to radio nodes 110 to allow radio nodes 110 to adjust their transmit powers to reduce interference (as indicated by the spatial RSSI metrics from neighboring radio nodes 110), while maintaining coverage (as indicated by the RSSI measurements provided by electronic devices 112).) (0052). Kumar, however, fails to disclose wherein the analysis is based solely on the obtained information on received signal strengths and does not require client data or position information. In a similar field of endeavor Fang discloses spatial-reuse classification in a mesh network. Fang, further describes a method wherein adjusting the transmission power of access points is based solely on received signal strength between the access points (More specifically, the spatial reuse feature in Wi-Fi 6 only considers the AP-to-AP (access point to access point) RSSI (received signal strength indication) to adjust the power of the transmitter (i.e., Tx power), and it does not consider the SR SINR (signal-to-interference plus noise ratio) on an existing link between an access point and a station in the mesh network.) (0006). Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kumar with the teachings of Fang. The motivation for this modification would have been to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 2, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first wireless test signal is transmitted from the at least some radio access entities with first signal transmit powers; and wherein the first signal transmit powers is taken into account during the analysis of the obtained information (the spatial RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 received from neighboring radio nodes 110, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of radio node 110-1 as a function of time at neighboring radio nodes 110. For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045) Regarding claim 3, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the first signal transmit powers are known from a configuration of the radio access entities which transmit a respective wireless test signal; and/or wherein a radio access entities which transmits a respective wireless test signal is configured to communicate its signal transmit power together with the wireless test signals (In some embodiments, the RSSIs measured by each of radio nodes 110 may include reference signal receive powers (RSRPs), where the RSRP is a measurement of the received power level in, e.g., an LTE network (such as small-cell network 108). For example, each small cell in an LTE radio network may transmit a cell-specific reference signal. The RSRP may be a type of RSSI measurement. Notably, it may be the power of the LTE reference signals spread over the full bandwidth and narrowband.) (0050). Regarding claims 4 and 13, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claims 1 and 12, wherein the step of analyzing the obtained information comprises calculating a metric on the basis of the obtained information (For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045). Regarding claims 5 and 14, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claims 4 and 13, wherein the metric is calculated as a sum or a weighted sum of: received signal strength values of the first wireless test signal which is transmitted from the at least some radio access entities and received by the one radio access entity (Moreover, radio node 110-1 may use the set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 to compute the spatial RSSI metric (such as a weighted mean). This spatial RSSI metric may represent the environment of radio node 110-1, i.e., it may incorporate the spatial context.) (0046). Regarding claim 6, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 5, wherein, when calculating the metric, a received signal strength value of the first wireless test signal is limited to a maximum value (threshold value) (The adjustment may include reducing the transmit power when a spatial received signal strength indication (RSSI) metric of the radio node is greater than a first threshold value and a coverage criterion is met. Note that the spatial RSSI metric of the radio node may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of the radio node received from the neighboring radio nodes, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of the radio node at the neighboring radio nodes. Moreover, the coverage criterion may be that less than a portion of RSSI measurements of the radio node associated with electronic devices, which are communicatively attached with the radio node, is less than a second threshold value. Alternatively, the adjustment may include increasing the transmit power when the spatial RSSI metric is less than the first threshold value.) (0007). Regarding claims 7 and 15, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the step of analyzing the obtained information further comprises mapping the calculated metric to a target signal transmit power based on a mapping function; and wherein the signal transmit power of the one radio access entity is set to the target signal transmit power (Then, the radio node may adjust the transmit power within a range of values. The adjustment may include reducing the transmit power when a spatial received signal strength indication (RSSI) metric of the radio node is greater than a first threshold value and a coverage criterion is met. Note that the spatial RSSI metric of the radio node may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of the radio node received from the neighboring radio nodes, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of the radio node at the neighboring radio nodes. Moreover, the coverage criterion may be that less than a portion of RSSI measurements of the radio node associated with electronic devices, which are communicatively attached with the radio node, is less than a second threshold value. Alternatively, the adjustment may include increasing the transmit power when the spatial RSSI metric is less than the first threshold value.) (0007). Regarding claim 8, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the mapping function is a monotone function or a step function (Note that the spatial RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 received from neighboring radio nodes 110, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of radio node 110-1 as a function of time at neighboring radio nodes 110. For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045). Regarding claim 9, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 7, comprising the further step of: inherently adjusting a boundary, a shape and/or an offset of the mapping function (Note that the spatial RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 received from neighboring radio nodes 110, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of radio node 110-1 as a function of time at neighboring radio nodes 110. For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045). Regarding claim 10, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the adjustment of the mapping function is inherently dependent on the frequency and/or bandwidth of the first test signal (Note that the spatial RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of radio node 110-1 received from neighboring radio nodes 110, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of radio node 110-1 as a function of time at neighboring radio nodes 110. For example, neighboring radio nodes 110 may perform measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 (i.e., neighboring radio nodes 110 may measure the signal strength of the signal from radio node 110-1 at neighboring radio nodes 110), and a given neighboring radio node may compute a temporal RSSI metric of radio node 110-1 (such as the median, a weighted mean or a filtered value) using the measurements of the RSSI of radio node 110-1 as a function of time that were performed by the given neighboring radio node.) (0045). Regarding claim 11, Kumar as modified discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the number of the at least some radio access entities which transmit the first wireless test signal is limited to a first number (A radio node may transmit a signal using a transmit power. Then, the radio node may adjust the transmit power within a range of values. The adjustment may include reducing the transmit power when a spatial received signal strength indication (RSSI) metric of the radio node is greater than a first threshold value and a coverage criterion is met. Note that the spatial RSSI metric of the radio node may correspond to a set of temporal RSSI metrics of the radio node received from neighboring radio nodes, where the set of temporal RSSI metrics may correspond to RSSI measurements of the radio node at the neighboring radio nodes. Moreover, the coverage criterion may be that less than a portion of RSSI measurements of the radio node associated with electronic devices, which are communicatively attached with the radio node, is less than a second threshold value. Alternatively, the adjustment may include increasing the transmit power when the spatial RSSI metric is less than the first threshold value.) (0026). 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 TEMICA M. BEAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7797. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 AM to 3:00 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, Matthew D. Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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. /TEMICA M BEAMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 16, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 13, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598673
COMMUNICATION DEVICE COMPRISING MOBILE TERMINATION DEVICE AND RADIO BASE STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587950
SECURE NETWORK IDENTIFICATION FOR ACTIVE SCANNING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581397
DISTRIBUTED WIRELESS LOCAL AREA NETWORK SCAN FOR LOW LATENCY APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574846
Wake-up Signal Reception for Paging Operations
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12532249
ROAMING STEERING METHOD, APPARATUS, DEVICE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
88%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+4.1%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1003 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