Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/386,234

RESOURCE COORDINATION SCHEMES IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 01, 2023
Examiner
RIVAS, SALVADOR E
Art Unit
2413
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
ZTE CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
590 granted / 726 resolved
+23.3% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
758
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
64.0%
+24.0% vs TC avg
§102
12.5%
-27.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 726 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 Election/Restrictions 2. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on December 29, 2025 for claims 9-11. Further, the Applicant argues, see Page 6 states “The above election is made with traverse because the independent Claims 1, 9, 12, and 17 (and their dependent claims) share the common technical features of receiving (or transmitting in Claim 12) resource configuration information. Specifically, the amended independent Claim 17 recites a communication apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to implement the method of Claim 9 in the elected Group II.” The examiner agrees since the amendments to independent claims 1, 12, and 17 coincide in teaching the subject matter of the elected independent claim 9. Therefore, the outstanding restriction requirement is withdrawn in light of Applicant's remarks and amendments to independent claims 1, 12, and 17 filed on December 29, 2025. Priority 3. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement 4. The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on November 1, 2023, February 25, 2025, and November 24, 2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file. Specification 5. 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. 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 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 6. 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. Claims 1, 7-13, 15-17, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ETSI (“TS 138 473 V.16.5.0”, April 2021). Regarding claim 1, the ETSI document teaches a method of wireless communication (Fig.8.10.2.2-1, page 72), comprising: receiving, by a first node of an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) network (read as gNB-DU (e.g.: IAB-donor-DU)(Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71)), a resource information that includes resource configuration information (read as gNB-DU receiving a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION message from a gNB-CU. (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.1, and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 69-71 and 210-211)), transmitting, by the first node (read as gNB-DU (e.g.: IAB-donor-DU)(Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71)), the resource information to a second node. (read as (read as gNB-DU transmitting a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION ACKNOWLEDGE message to a gNB-CU. (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.2, and 9.2.9.4, page(s) 69-71 and 150)) Regarding claim 9, the ETSI document teaches a method of wireless communication (Fig.8.10.2.2-1, page 72), comprising: receiving, by a first node of an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) network (read as gNB-DU (e.g.: IAB-donor-DU)(Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71)), a resource configuration information from a second node (read as gNB-DU receiving a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION message from a gNB-CU. (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.1, and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 69-71 and 210-211)), wherein the first node is a first donor node (read as gNB-DU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71) For example, “"gNB-DU" applies to IAB-DU and IAB-donor-DU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)), the second node (read as gNB-CU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71); For example, “"gNB-CU" applies to IAB-donor-CU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)) is a second donor node (read as IAB-donor-CU (Section 8.10.0, page 69)) or an IAB node, and wherein the resource configuration information includes resource configurations (read as GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.2.1, 9.2.9.3, and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 70-71, 147, and 210-211)) of at least one of (i) another an IAB node (read as Child-Node List IE (Section(s) 8.10.2.2 and 9.2.9.3, page(s) 71 and 148)) or (ii) a parent node of another the IAB node. Regarding claim 12, the ETSI document teaches a method of wireless communication (Fig.8.10.2.2-1, page 72), comprising: transmitting, by a first node (read as gNB-DU (e.g.: IAB-donor-DU)(Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71)) of an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) network, resource information to a second node (read as (read as gNB-DU transmitting a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION ACKNOWLEDGE message to a gNB-CU. (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.2, and 9.2.9.4, page(s) 69-71 and 150)), wherein the resource information includes resource configuration information. (read as a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION ACKNOWLEDGE message (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.2, and 9.2.9.4, page(s) 69-71 and 150)) Regarding claim 17, the ETSI document teaches a communication apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to implement a method (read as it is inherent that the gNB-DU and gNB-CU can be equipped with a processor to generate and exchange configuration messages as shown Fig.8.10.2.2-1 (page 72)), comprising: receiving a resource configuration information from a second node (read as gNB-DU receiving a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION from a gNB-CU. (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.0, 8.10.2.1, and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 69-71 and 210-211)), wherein the second node (read as gNB-CU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71); For example, “"gNB-CU" applies to IAB-donor-CU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)) is a second donor node (read as IAB-donor-CU (Section 8.10.0, page 69)) or an IAB node, and wherein the resource configuration information includes resource configurations (read as GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71 and Section(s) 8.10.2.1, 9.2.9.3, and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 70-71, 147, and 210-211)) of at least one of (i) another an IAB node (read as Child-Node List IE (Section(s) 8.10.2.2 and 9.2.9.3, page(s) 71 and 148)) or (ii) a parent node of another the IAB node. Regarding claims 7,10, 15, and 21, and as applied to claims 1, 9, 12, and 17 above, The ETSI document teaches a method wherein the resource configuration information (read as gNB-DU Cell Resource Configuration (Section(s) 9.2.9.3 and 9.3.1.107, page(s) 147 and 211)) includes at least one of (i) gNB-DU (distributed unit) cell resource configuration including at least one of subcarrier spacing (read as Subcarrier Spacing (Section 9.3.1.107, page 211)), DUF (downlink/uplink/flexible) transmission periodicity (read as DUF Transmission Periodicity (Section 9.3.1.107, page 211)), DUF slot configuration list (read as DUF Slot Configuration List (Section 9.3.1.107, page 211)), HSNA (hard/soft/not-available) transmission periodicity (read as HSNA Transmission Periodicity (Section 9.3.1.107, page 211)), or HSNA slot configuration list (read as HSNA Slot Configuration List (Section 9.3.1.107, page 211)), or (ii) cell specific configuration. (read as Report Characteristics IE (Section 8.2.10, page 37)) Regarding claims 8. 11, 16, and 22, and as applied to claim 9 above, the ETSI document teaches a method wherein the receiving is performed via an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message (read as XnAP communication (Section 2, page 16)) or a F1 application protocol (F1AP) message (read as F1AP message(s)(page Section 6, page 20)) or a radio resource control (RRC) message. (read as RRC message (Section 8.4, 8.4.2, and 9.2.3.2, page(s) 58-59 and 137-138)) Regarding claim 13, and as applied to claim 12 above, the ETSI document teaches a method wherein the first node corresponds to an IAB node (read as gNB-DU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71) For example, “"gNB-DU" applies to IAB-DU and IAB-donor-DU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)) and the second node corresponds to a donor node (read as gNB-CU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71); For example, “"gNB-CU" applies to IAB-donor-CU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)), wherein the first node is a migrating IAB node or a boundary IAB node and the second node corresponds to a donor node, or wherein the first node corresponds to a first IAB donor node (read as IAB-donor-DU (Section 8.10.0, page 69)) and the second node corresponds to a second IAB donor node (read as IAB-donor-CU (Section 8.10.0, page 69)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 7. 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 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 of this title, 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ETSI (“TS 138 473 V.16.5.0”, April 2021) in view of Yi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2024/0015633 A1). Regarding claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, the ETSI document teaches a method wherein the first node is a first donor node (read as gNB-DU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71) For example, “"gNB-DU" applies to IAB-DU and IAB-donor-DU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)), and the second node (read as gNB-CU (Fig.8.10.2.2, page 71); For example, “"gNB-CU" applies to IAB-donor-CU, …”(Section 8.10.0, page 69)) corresponds to a an IAB node or a donor node (read as IAB-donor-CU (Section 8.10.0, page 69)), However, the ETSI document fails to explicitly teach wherein the first IAB node is a parent node of a second IAB node. Yi et al. teach an IAB topology (Fig.1) wherein the first IAB node is a parent node (Fig.1 @ 301) of a second IAB node (Fig.1 @ 100). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the IAB topology as taught by Yi et al. with IAB procedures as taught by the ETSI document for the purpose of improving signaling by devices in an IAB network. Conclusion 8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: Peng et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0337206 A1) teach “In the Rel-16 IAB network, a donor node CU configures a time domain resource of the DU by using signaling gNB-DU resource configuration (gNB-DU resource configuration) in an F1-AP (or an F1-C).”(Fig.2; Paragraph [0050]) Park et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0117298 A1) teach “The IAB node may receive a setting or scheduling of a resource configuration for each of DU/MT from a donor node or a CU in an IAB system.”(Paragraph [0050]) Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 Any inquiry concerning this communication or early communications from the Examiner should be directed to Salvador E. Rivas whose telephone number is (571) 270-1784. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00AM to 3:30PM. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Un C. Cho can be reached on (571) 272- 7919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600. /SALVADOR E RIVAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413 February 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604301
USER EQUIPMENT AND RESOURCE MONITORING METHOD IN SIDELINK COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588017
METHOD AND APPARATUS OF MULTI-LINK COMMUNICATION FOR VEHICLE IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEM BASED ON FRAME INFORMATION INCLUDING MULTIPLE INFORMATION SCHEMES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587483
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR EVALUATING COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580627
BEAM-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS FOR CORESET OR SS SET HAVING DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563568
Methods and Apparatus for Utilizing Short Transmission Time Intervals in a Wireless Communications Network
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.7%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 726 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