Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/400,658

ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR PERFORMING ANTENNA TUNING AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 29, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, TUAN HOANG
Art Unit
2649
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
1362 granted / 1508 resolved
+28.3% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1536
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.7%
+15.7% vs TC avg
§102
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
§112
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1508 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Priority 1. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement 2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/29/2023, 07/09/2024 and 01/03/2025 has been considered by Examiner and made of record in the application file. Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103 3. 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. 4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (U.S PAT. 11,218,181, hereinafter “Yu”) in view of Gopal et al. (U.S PAT. 11,596,015, hereinafter “Gopal”). Consider claim 1, Yu teaches an electronic device comprising: memory storing instructions; a plurality of antennas including a first antenna configured to transmit and receive radio frequency (RF) signals corresponding to a first radio access technology (RAT) and a second RAT, and a second antenna configured to receive RF signals corresponding to the first RAT and the second RAT (col. 12, lines 10-50); an RF circuit (Fig. 3A, item 330) coupled to the plurality of antennas (Fig. 3A, items 335a and 335b); and at least one communication processor, comprising processing circuitry (Fig. 3A, item 302), operatively coupled to the memory and the RF circuit (Fig. 3A, col. 14, line 57 through col. 15, line 27), and operate in a first antenna tuning mode, based on an electric field based on the first RAT being equal to or greater than a first value, and operate in a second antenna tuning mode, based on the electric field based on the first RAT being less than the first value, during execution of the voice call (col. 21, line 52 through col. 22, line 17), and wherein based on the first antenna tuning mode being switched to the second antenna tuning mode according to a change in the electric field, a parameter associated with antenna sensitivity of the second transmission channel connection based on the second RAT decreases (fig. 5, col. 18 lines 29-46). Yu does not explicitly show that wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: establish a first transmission channel connection based on the first RAT and a second transmission channel connection based on the second RAT using one of the plurality of antennas, identify whether a voice call based on the first RAT is executed. In the same field of endeavor, Gopal teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: establish a first transmission channel connection based on the first RAT and a second transmission channel connection based on the second RAT using one of the plurality of antennas, identify whether a voice call based on the first RAT is executed (col. 5, lines 12-24 and col. 25, lines 32-53). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: establish a first transmission channel connection based on the first RAT and a second transmission channel connection based on the second RAT using one of the plurality of antennas, identify whether a voice call based on the first RAT is executed, as taught by Gopal, in order for establishing a first communication link using a first RAT; establishing a second communication link using a second RAT; determining whether to prioritize antenna selection for the first communication link using the first RAT or the second communication link using the second RAT; and prioritizing antenna selection for the first communication link or the second communication link based at least in part on the determination. Consider claim 2, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to control the RF circuit to use the first antenna tuning mode, based on identifying that the voice call is not executed (col. 4, lines 27-51). Consider claim 3, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, that when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively cause the electronic device to identify the electric field based on the first RAT, based on identifying a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) corresponding to the first antenna during the execution of the voice call (col. 4, lines 27-51). Consider claim 4, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, that when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to identify the parameter associated with the antenna sensitivity of the second transmission channel connection, based on identifying a reference signal received power (RSRP) or a signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) of a signal received through the first antenna based on the second RAT (col. 24, lines 35-62). Consider claim 5, Gopal further teaches wherein the first RAT and the second RAT are different from each other, wherein the first antenna is an antenna configured to transmit and receive an RF signal in a frequency band corresponding to the first RAT and an RF signal in a frequency band corresponding to the second RAT, and wherein at least a part of the frequency band corresponding to the second RAT is the same as the frequency band corresponding to the first RAT (col. 22, lines 8-23). Consider claim 6, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, that when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: set the first antenna to be tuned to the first RAT and the second RAT as at least a part of operating in the first antenna tuning mode (col. 18, lines 29-46), and set the first antenna to be tuned to the first RAT as at least a part of operating in the second antenna tuning mode RAT (col. 22, lines 18-40). Consider claim 7, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, that when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: identify a strength of a signal received through the first antenna based on the first RAT during the execution of the voice call, and based on identifying that the strength of the received signal is less than the first value, control the RF circuit to switch from the first antenna tuning mode to the second antenna tuning mode to prioritize voice call quality (col. 21, line 52 through col. 22, line 17). Consider claim 8, Yu further teaches wherein the instructions, that when executed by at least one communication processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: identify whether the voice call is terminated, and based on identifying that the voice call is terminated, control the RF circuit to switch from the second antenna tuning mode to the first antenna tuning mode (col. 18, lines 29-46). Consider claim 9, Yu further teaches wherein the first RAT is associated with long term evolution (LTE), the second RAT is associated with new radio (NR), and the voice call is based on voice over LTE (VoLTE) (col. 23, lines 11-24). Consider claim 10, Gopal further teaches wherein the first RAT is associated with NR, the second RAT is associated with LTE, and the voice call is based on voice over NR (VoNR) (col. 33, line 36-52). Consider claim 11, the subject-matter of independent claim 11 relates to a method of operating an electronic device with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 11. Consider claim 12, the previous rejections of claim 2 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 12. Consider claim 13, the previous rejections of claim 3 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 13. Consider claim 14, the previous rejections of claim 4 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 14. Consider claim 15, the previous rejections of claim 5 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 15. Consider claim 16, the previous rejections of claim 6 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 16. Consider claim 17, the previous rejections of claim 7 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 17. Consider claim 18, the previous rejections of claim 8 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 18. Consider claim 19, the previous rejections of claim 9 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 19. Consider claim 20, the subject-matter of independent claim 20 relates to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, that when executed by at least one processor of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform at least one operation with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 20. Conclusion 5. Any response to this action should be mailed to: Mail Stop_________ (Explanation, e.g., Amendment or After-final, etc.) Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 Facsimile responses should be faxed to: (571) 273-8300 Hand-delivered responses should be brought to: Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22313 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-8329. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00Am - 5:00Pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pan Yuwen can be reached on (571) 272-7855. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /TUAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587978
DIFFERENTIAL POWER PARAMETER REPORTING IN MULTI-PANEL UPLINK TRANSMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581546
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581547
WIRELESS CONNECTION BETWEEN A STREAMING DEVICE AND A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580609
ELECTRONIC SHELF LABEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574103
PROXY DEVICE IN SATELLITE INTEGRATED TERRESTRIAL NETWORK AND OPERATION METHOD OF SAME
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
94%
With Interview (+4.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1508 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