Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/414,877

DELTA CONFIGURATION FOR LAYER 1/LAYER 2 TRIGGERED MOBILITY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 17, 2024
Priority
Feb 15, 2023 — provisional 63/485,166
Examiner
SHARMA, GAUTAM
Art Unit
2467
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
566 granted / 644 resolved
+29.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
660
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
85.8%
+45.8% vs TC avg
§102
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§112
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 644 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 . Claims 1-20 are pending. 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. The factual inquiries 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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paterson et al, application no. 2021/0259038, hereinafter known as Paterson in view of 3GPP TSG-RAN2 Meeting #120 R2-2212069 Toulouse, France, 14 - 18 November 2022 8.4.2.2 Agenda Item: Huawei, HiSilicon Source: Configuration of candidate target configurations (pre-configurations) for LTM hereinafter known as Huawei. As to claim 1, Paterson discloses a first network node for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory (Paterson, figure 4, CU and DU of the art with controller and memory), configured to: receive, from a second network node, an indication of a reference layer 1/layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) configuration (Paterson, [0093]-[0095], figure 7, step S701, triggered mobility determination at first node (CU), step S703, sending to first node (target DU) by second node (en-gNB-cu) UE context setup request); identify, based at least in part on the reference configuration, one or more candidate cell configurations associated with one or more candidate cells for an UE context setup procedure (Paterson, [0039]-[0040], target DU determining UE context for triggered mobility with delta or full configuration determination); and transmit, to the second network node, an indication of the one or more candidate cell configurations (Paterson, [0093]-[0095], S704, sending by first node (target DU) to second node (en-gNB-CU), UE context response with full or partial configuration). Paterson does not expressly disclose however Huawei disclose triggered mobility being layer 1/layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure (Huawei, section 2: layer 1/layer 2 triggered mobility setup procedure between CU and target DU with delta or full configurations). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Paterson to include the limitations of triggered mobility being layer 1/layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure as taught by Huawei. Use of LTM procedure allow faster setup communication context setup for UE with less signaling overhead. As to claim 2, Paterson discloses wherein the first network node is a distributed unit of a network entity, and wherein the second network node is a centralized unit of a network entity (Paterson, figure 7 and 8, target DU as first node and en-gNB-CU are second node). As to claim 3, Paterson and Huawei disclose the first network node of claim 1. Paterson does not disclose however Huawei discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive, from the second network node, an indication of source cell information associated with a source cell of a user equipment (UE), wherein identifying the one or more candidate cell configurations is further based at least in part on the source cell information (Huawei, page 2, section 2.2, delta configuration LTM, where UE configuration for target candidate cell uses pre-configuration information based on source cell information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Paterson to include the limitations of wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive, from the second network node, an indication of source cell information associated with a source cell of a user equipment (UE), wherein identifying the one or more candidate cell configurations is further based at least in part on the source cell information as taught by Huawei. Source cell information used for candidate cell configuration provides delta configuration information thereby speeding up bearer set up and reducing signaling overhead. As to claim 4, Paterson discloses wherein the one or more candidate cell configurations are associated with a candidate cell group configuration (Paterson, [0039]-[0040], target DU (candidate cell) providing configurations information to CU). As to claim 5, Paterson discloses wherein the one or more candidate cell configurations are associated with one or more delta configurations with respect to the reference LTM configuration (Paterson, [0039]-[0040], target DU (candidate cell) providing configurations information to CU, where the configuration is delta or full configuration). As to claim 6, Paterson discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to transmit, to the second network node, an indication that the one or more candidate cell configurations are associated with the one or more delta configurations (Paterson, [0093]-[0095], S704, sending by first node target DU to second node en-gNB-CU, UE context response with full or partial configuration). As to claim 7, Paterson discloses wherein the one or more candidate cell configurations are associated with one or more full configurations (Paterson, [0039]-[0040], target DU (candidate cell) providing configurations information to CU, where the configuration is delta or full configuration). As to claim 8, Paterson discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to transmit, to the second network node, an indication that the one or more candidate cell configurations are associated with the one or more full configurations (Paterson, [0039]-[0040], target DU (candidate cell) providing configurations information to CU, where the configuration is delta or full configuration; [0093]-[0095], S704, sending by first node target DU to second node en-gNB-CU, UE context response with full or partial configuration). As to claims 9-16, the claims are rejected as applied to claims 1-8 respectively above by Paterson in view of Huawei. As to claims 17-20, the claims are rejected as applied to claims 1, 4, 5 and 7 respectively above by Paterson in view of Huawei. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAUTAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7182. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm. 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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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. /GAUTAM SHARMA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2467 /MICHAEL J MOORE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 16, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 23, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 23, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12641660
DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD, DATA TRANSMISSION APPARATUS, PROCESSOR, AND MOBILE TERMINAL
1y 10m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12634066
REFERENCE SIGNAL PHASE TIME DRIFT MODEL REPORTING FOR REFERENCE SIGNAL TIME-DOMAIN COHERENCY IN NEW RADIO
3y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12628219
DEVICE, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR MULTI-LINK (ML) RECONFIGURATION
4y 1m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12621833
TRANSMISSION OF DEFERRED SPS HARQ FEEDBACK COINCIDING WITH CURRENT PUCCH
2y 11m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12615640
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING CONTROL CHANNEL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 6m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 644 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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