Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/431,236

APPARATUS, BASE STATION APPARATUS, AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 02, 2024
Examiner
SLOMS, NICHOLAS
Art Unit
2476
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
398 granted / 586 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
621
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
54.9%
+14.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 586 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-15 are currently pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2023/0345332 A1 (hereinafter “Wang”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wang, in view of the non-patent literature document titled Handling Leftovers from Email Discussion on Switching Notification (hereinafter “R2-2103346”)1. Regarding claims 1, 6 and 11: Wang teaches an apparatus comprising: a memory storing a program; and one or more processors configured to execute the program to: process communication with a first network and a second network (see, e.g., figures 1 and 2; terminal 120 communicates with network 110 and network 111); receive, from a base station apparatus in the first network, a radio resource control, RRC, message including first information for indicating a starting position of an aperiodic gap and second information for indicating a length of the aperiodic gap in a case where the apparatus is in RRC connected state in the first network; determine the aperiodic gap based on the first information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap and the second information for indicating the length of the aperiodic gap; and perform a switching for the communication with the second network within the aperiodic gap, (see, e.g., [0051]-[0059]; the terminal determines one-shot gap configuration upon reception, including starting and duration information of the gap; after which, switching is performed); wherein the first information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap and the second information for indicating the length of the aperiodic gap are not maintained for the aperiodic gap (see, e.g., [0052]-[0059], [0088]; the one shot configuration is not maintained). Wang teaches configuration signaling both from the terminal to the network, as well as from the network to the UE. Wang does not explicitly state wherein the downlink information includes the gap starting and length information. To the extent this feature is not inherent to Wang, it is nevertheless taught in R2-2103346 (see, e.g., section 2.2.2.2; note indication of configuration information). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application incorporate features from the system of R2-2103346, such as the indication functionality, within the system of Wang, in order to confirm and/or negotiate functionality. The rationale set forth above regarding the apparatus of claim 1 is applicable to the base station and method of claims 6 and 11, respectively. Regarding claims 2, 7, and 12: Wang alternatively modified by R2-2103346 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute the program to transmit, to the base station apparatus in the first network, a UEAssistanceInformation message including third information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap, the aperiodic gap is determined based on the third information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap included in the UEAssistanceInformation message (see, e.g., Wang [0045], [0052]-[0059]; a UEAssistanceInformation message is transmitted; note additionally/alternatively R2-2103346 p. 2). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 2. The rationale set forth above regarding the apparatus of claim 2 is applicable to the base station and method of claims 7 and 12, respectively. Regarding claims 3, 8, and 13: Wang alternatively modified by R2-2103346 further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute the program to: receive, from the base station apparatus in the first network, the RRC message including fourth information for configuring a periodic gap; receive, from the base station apparatus in the first network, the RRC message including fifth information for indicating release of the periodic gap; perform a switching for the communication with the second network within the periodic gap based on the fourth information for configuring the periodic gap; and release the fourth information for configuring the periodic gap based on receiving the fifth information for indicating the release of the periodic gap (see, e.g., Wang [0045], [0052]-[0059]; and/or R2-2103346 pp. 7-11; note signaling). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 3. The rationale set forth above regarding the apparatus of claim 3 is applicable to the base station and method of claims 8 and 13, respectively. Regarding claims 4, 9, and 14: Wang alternatively modified by R2-2103346 further teaches wherein the first information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap and the second information for indicating the length of the aperiodic gap are released without receiving any information for indicating the release of the aperiodic gap (see, e.g., Wang [0045], [0052]-[0059]; and/or R2-2103346 p. 7-11; note signaling, e.g. at p. 9 – functionality without response). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 4. The rationale set forth above regarding the apparatus of claim 4 is applicable to the base station and method of claims 9 and 14, respectively. Regarding claims 5, 10, and 15: Wang alternatively modified by R2-2103346 further teaches wherein the first information for indicating the starting position of the aperiodic gap and the second information for indicating the length of the aperiodic gap are not stored for the aperiodic gap (see, e.g., [0052]-[0059], [0088]; the one shot configuration is not maintained). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 5. The rationale set forth above regarding the apparatus of claim 5 is applicable to the base station and method of claims 10 and 15, respectively. Relevant Art 8. The following prior art not relied upon in this Office action is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See form PTO-892. Conclusion 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SLOMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST. 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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. /NICHOLAS SLOMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476 1 R2-21003346 was cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement submitted May 24, 2024 (Non-Patent Literature Documents, cite. No. CG).
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 02, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598040
RESOURCE BLOCK GROUP SIZES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588047
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SENSING MEASUREMENT AND REPORT FOR SIDELINK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12567899
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563512
COORDINATED BEAMFORMING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550146
UPLINK CHANNEL REPETITIONS ACROSS DIFFERENT NETWORK POWER MODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
68%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+9.9%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 586 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