Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/441,365

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING LTE FALLBACK FOR WIRELESS DEVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 14, 2024
Examiner
HUANG, WEIBIN
Art Unit
2471
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
T-Mobile Innovations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
573 granted / 646 resolved
+30.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
690
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
§103
40.6%
+0.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 646 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 . Claim Status This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 02/14/2024. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently presenting for examination. Claim(s) 1, 8, and 14 is/are independent claim(s). Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected. This action has been made NON-FINAL. 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 8-9, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20240187883_A1_Ali in view of US_20250254589_A1_Sevilla. Regarding claim 1, Ali discloses a method of managing LTE fallback for a wireless device (Ali figure 14), the method comprising: monitoring a temperature of the wireless device (Ali figure 14, elements 1404-1408, also see figure 15); determining that the wireless device is using a network slice (Ali figure 14, element 1402, also see figure 5); responsive to the temperature of the wireless device rising to meet a first temperature threshold, transmitting a notification from the wireless device indicating the temperature of the wireless device and indicating parameters for the network slice (Ali figure 14, element 1408, paragraph 116, “Otherwise, at step 1408, the UE sends the proposed heat reduction parameters to the BS”); and establishing an LTE session for the wireless device in accordance with a performance information for the wireless device based, at least in part, on the parameters for the network slice (Ali figure 14 elements 1410-1412, paragraph 116), but does not disclose the performance information is a performance profile. Sevilla discloses the performance information is a performance profile (Sevilla paragraph 12, “…obtained from a subscriber profile… associated with LTE fallback”, also see paragraph 24). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Sevilla’s performing LTE fallback in according to the subscriber profile in Ali’s system to provide appropriate service to the user. This method for improving the system of Ali was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Sevilla. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali and Sevilla to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1. Regarding claim 2, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 1, and Ali further discloses the method further comprising: responsive to the temperature of the wireless device rising to meet a second temperature threshold higher than the first temperature threshold, migrating the wireless device to the LTE session (Ali figure 14 elements 1410-1412, paragraph 116, LTE fallback). Regarding claim 8, Ali and Sevilla disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 1, and Sevilla further discloses a system, the system comprising: a Mobility Management Entity (MME) including at least one electronic processor configured to perform operations (Sevilla paragraph 24, MME). Regarding claim 9, Ali and Sevilla disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 2. Regarding claim 14, Ali and Sevilla disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 8. Regarding claim 15, Ali and Sevilla disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 2. Claim(s) 3 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20240187883_A1_Ali in view of US_20250254589_A1_Sevilla and US_20250133455_A1_Pati. Regarding claim 3, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the method further comprises disconnecting the wireless device from the network slice. Pati discloses wherein the method further comprises disconnecting the wireless device from the network slice (Pati paragraph 84, “For example, the method comprises identifying that the temperature of the UE reaches the maximum temperature level, and in response to identifying that the temperature of the UE reaches the maximum temperature level, disconnecting the communication session and establish another communication session via the second RAT managed by a network.”). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Pati’s disconnecting the communication session and establish another communication session via the second RAT managed by a network when the UE reaches the maximum temperature level in Ali and Sevilla’s system to prevent hardware damage, ensure device longevity, and maintain reliable service. This method for improving the system of Ali and Sevilla was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Pati. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali, Sevilla and Pati to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3. Regarding claim 16, Ali, Sevilla and Pati disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 3. Claim(s) 4-5, 10-11, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20240187883_A1_Ali in view of US_20250254589_A1_Sevilla and US_20200288352_A1_Hu. Regarding claim 4, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 1, but do not disclose wherein the performance profile comprises parameters for guaranteed bit rate. Hu discloses wherein the performance profile comprises parameters for guaranteed bit rate (Hu paragraph 78, “…a profile in local policy can include information associated with one or more of enabling QoS, a disabling QoS, a QoS Class Identifier (QCI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR), a maximum bit rate (MBR), an aggregate maximum bit rate (AMBR) such as an Access Point Name-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate and/or a User Equipment-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate (UE-AMBR), APN-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate (APN-AMBR), a QoS Flow Identifier (QFI)…”). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Hu’s a profile in local policy can include information associated with an Allocation and Retention Priority, a Guaranteed Bit Rate, and other service parameters in Ali and Sevilla’s system to ensure better customer experiences and efficient network management. This method for improving the system of Ali and Sevilla was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hu. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali, Sevilla and Hu to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4. Regarding claim 5, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 1, but do not disclose wherein the performance profile comprises parameters for packet scheduling prioritization. Hu discloses wherein the performance profile comprises parameters for packet scheduling prioritization (Hu paragraph 78, “…a profile in local policy can include information associated with one or more of enabling QoS, a disabling QoS, a QoS Class Identifier (QCI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR), a maximum bit rate (MBR), an aggregate maximum bit rate (AMBR) such as an Access Point Name-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate and/or a User Equipment-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate (UE-AMBR), APN-Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate (APN-AMBR), a QoS Flow Identifier (QFI)…”). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Hu’s a profile in local policy can include information associated with an Allocation and Retention Priority, a Guaranteed Bit Rate, and other service parameters in Ali and Sevilla’s system to ensure better customer experiences and efficient network management. This method for improving the system of Ali and Sevilla was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hu. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali, Sevilla and Hu to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5. Regarding claim 10, Ali, Sevilla and Hu disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 4. Regarding claim 11, Ali, Sevilla and Hu disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 5. Regarding claim 17, Ali, Sevilla and Hu disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 4. Regarding claim 18, Ali, Sevilla and Hu disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 5. Claim(s) 6-7, 12-13, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20240187883_A1_Ali in view of US_20250254589_A1_Sevilla and US_20250193768_A1_Karapantelakis. Regarding claim 6, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 1, but do not disclose wherein the performance profile is selected from a list of preexisting candidate performance profiles. Karapantelakis discloses wherein the performance profile is selected from a list of preexisting candidate performance profiles (Karapantelakis paragraph 10, “UE-determined access: UEs are also capable of determining to which RAT they should connect to e.g., 3G, 4G, 5G, implicitly where the UE is configured to access a specific RAT, via rule-based approach such as “5G Auto” where the UE determines based on measured latency/throughput which type of connection to use for example fallback to 4G if there is no need for 5G. In addition, Home Subscriber Server (HSS) or Unified Data Management (UDM) can be used to determine a preferred profile for a user's connection thus letting a 3GPP network determine which kind of connection a UE should use”, also see paragraphs 124, 142). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Karapantelakis’s determining a preferred profile for a user's connection during fallback in Ali and Sevilla’s system to ensure better customer experiences and efficient network management. This method for improving the system of Ali and Sevilla was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Karapantelakis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6. Regarding claim 7, Ali and Sevilla disclose the method of claim 6, but do not disclose wherein the performance profile is selected from the list of preexisting candidate performance profiles to approximate a quality of service provided by the network slice. Karapantelakis discloses wherein the performance profile is selected from the list of preexisting candidate performance profiles to approximate a quality of service provided by the network slice (Karapantelakis paragraph 10, “UE-determined access: UEs are also capable of determining to which RAT they should connect to e.g., 3G, 4G, 5G, implicitly where the UE is configured to access a specific RAT, via rule-based approach such as “5G Auto” where the UE determines based on measured latency/throughput which type of connection to use for example fallback to 4G if there is no need for 5G. In addition, Home Subscriber Server (HSS) or Unified Data Management (UDM) can be used to determine a preferred profile for a user's connection thus letting a 3GPP network determine which kind of connection a UE should use”, also see paragraphs 124, 142). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Karapantelakis’s determining a preferred profile for a user's connection during fallback in Ali and Sevilla’s system to ensure better customer experiences and efficient network management. This method for improving the system of Ali and Sevilla was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Karapantelakis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7. Regarding claim 12, Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 6. Regarding claim 13, Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 7. Regarding claim 19, Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 6. Regarding claim 20, Ali, Sevilla and Karapantelakis disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 7. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM. 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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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. /W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471 /MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598141
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR TIME STAMPING OF PACKET DATA IN VIRTUALIZED AND CLOUD ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581404
AI-BASED MODEL USE FOR NETWORK ENERGY SAVINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12520188
Mapping Information for Integrated Access and Backhaul
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12507082
Method and Apparatus of Handling Coordinated Association in a Wireless Network with Multiple Access Points
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12507312
MULTIPLE SCG CONFIGURATIONS IN A RRC INACTIVE STATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
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
89%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+5.8%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 646 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