Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/420,217

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR L1 MEASUREMENT AND REPORTING FOR L1/L2-BASED MOBILITY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 23, 2024
Examiner
BHATTACHARYA, SAM
Art Unit
2646
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allow Rate
947 granted / 1018 resolved
+31.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1043
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§102
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1018 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 . 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)(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, 10, 11, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification” (hereinafter, TS 38.331). Regarding claims 1, 11 and 20, TS 38.331 discloses a user equipment comprising a processor; and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions (Page 115, Section 5.3.5.13d: “memory reserved for storing application layer measurement reports”) that, when executed, cause the processor to perform a method comprising: detecting, by a user equipment (UE), that a condition for triggering a layer-1 (L1) measurement report transmission is satisfied based on a layer-3 (L3) measurement (page 182, Section 5.5.4.1: “if the reportType is set to eventTriggered and if the entry condition applicable for this event, i.e. the event corresponding with the eventId of the corresponding reportConfig within VarMeasConfig, is fulfilled for one or more applicable cells for all measurements after layer 3 filtering taken during timeToTrigger defined for this event within the VarMeasConfig, while the VarMeasReportList does not include a measurement reporting entry for this measId”); determining, by the UE, whether the condition is detected over a first duration based on an L1 measurement, in response to detecting that the condition is satisfied based on the L3 measurement (the timeToTrigger parameter requires that the L3 filtered event condition persists for a configured duration before the event is considered triggered.); and transmitting, by the UE, the measurement report, in case that the condition is detected over the first duration (page 198, Section 5.5.5.1: “The purpose of this procedure is to transfer measurement results from the UE to the network. The UE shall initiate this procedure only after successful AS security activation. For the measId for which the measurement reporting procedure was triggered, the UE shall set the measResults within the MeasurementReport message”). Regarding claims 10 and 19, TS 38.331 discloses that detecting whether the condition is detected over the first duration comprises: detecting that the condition is held continuously over the first duration; or detecting a predetermined number of instances of the condition over the first duration, wherein the first duration begins at a first instance of the condition or the first duration is predefined based on a timeline, and wherein transmission of the measurement report is triggered after a last instance of the predetermined number of instances over the first duration (page 849: “The IE TimeToTrigger specifies the value range used for time to trigger parameter, which concerns the time during which specific criteria for the event needs to be met in order to trigger a measurement report.”). 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. Claims 7-9, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS 38.331 in view of “NR; Physical layer procedures for data” (hereinafter, TS 38.214). Regarding claims 7, 8 and 17, TS 38.331 fails to disclose that the measurement report is transmitted via CSI on PUSCH, and the CSI is split into a first part and a second part, and that the second part is multiplexed with other CSI, and the measurement report has a higher priority than the other CSI. However, in an analogous art, TS 38.214 discloses that a measurement report is transmitted via CSI on PUSCH, and the CSI is split into a first part and a second part (page 100, Section 5.2.3: “For Type I, Type II and Enhanced Type II CSI feedback on PUSCH, a CSI report comprises of two parts. Part 1 has a fixed payload size and is used to identify the number of information bits in Part 2. Part 1 shall be transmitted in its entirety before Part 2 … Part 1 and 2 are separately encoded”). Furthermore, TS 38.214 discloses that the second part is multiplexed with other CSI, and the measurement report has a higher priority than the other CSI (Section 5.2.3: “CSI reporting on PUSCH can be multiplexed with uplink data on PUSCH except that semi-persistent CSI reporting on PUSCH activated by a DCI format is not expected to be multiplexed with uplink data on the PUSCH. CSI reporting on PUSCH can also be performed without any multiplexing with uplink data from the UE.”; Section 5.2.5: “A first CSI report is said to have priority over second CSI report if the associated … value is lower for the first report than for the second report.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify TS 38.331 by incorporating these features taught in TS 38.214 for the purpose of ensuring that the measurement report is delivered reliably even when competing with other CSI. Regarding claims 9 and 18, TS 38.331 fails to disclose that the measurement report is transmitted via semi-persistent CSI on PUSCH, and the measurement report has a higher priority than uplink (UL)-shared channel (SCH)-only PUSCH. However, TS 38.214 discloses that the measurement report is transmitted via semi-persistent CSI on PUSCH, and the measurement report has a higher priority than uplink (UL)-shared channel (SCH)-only PUSCH (Section 5.2.4: “Semi-persistent CSI reporting on the PUCCH supports Type I CSI. Semi-persistent CSI reporting on the PUCCH format 2 supports Type I CSI with wideband frequency granularity. Semipersistent CSI reporting on PUCCH formats 3 or 4 supports Type I CSI with wideband and sub-band frequency granularities and Type II CSI Part 1.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify TS 38.331 by incorporating this feature taught in TS 38.214 for the purpose of enabling more accurate precoding, scheduling and link adaptation. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6 and 12-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose the recited combinations of elements, including wherein detecting that the condition is satisfied comprises: determining, by the UE, whether the condition is satisfied based on the L3 measurement; and determining, by the UE, whether the condition, based on the L3 measurement, is held for a second duration, in case that the condition is satisfied, wherein the UE determines whether the condition, based on the L1 measurement, is detected over the first duration, in case that the condition, based on the L3 measurement, is held for the second duration, as in claims 2 and 12. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liu et al. (US 2023/0189046) discloses SR for reporting L1 measurement which is triggered by a L3 measurements is transmitted in a dedicated PUCCH resource configured by the gNB for the reporting. Faxér et al. (US 2019/0199420) discloses CSI from Multiple Cells or Multiple CSI Reports Multiplexed in Single UCI. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAM BHATTACHARYA whose telephone number is (571)272-7917. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays, 9-5:30. 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. /SAM BHATTACHARYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601848
RANDOM ACCESS TYPE SELECTION BASED ON ACCURACY OF SATELLITE POSITIONING INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604213
COMMUNICATION CONTROL SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598579
COLLABORATIVE GEOLOCATION OF AN ACCESS POINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593298
METHOD OF ESTIMATING A GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF A MOBILE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579772
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION IN AN IMAGE
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
93%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+6.2%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1018 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