Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/452,163

Wireless Communication Method and Apparatus

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 18, 2023
Examiner
PASCUAL PEGUERO, NATALI
Art Unit
2463
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
332 granted / 387 resolved
+27.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
404
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
§103
59.1%
+19.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 387 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The instant application having Application No. 18/452,163 filed on 08/18/2023 is presented for examination by the examiner. 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 . Priority As required by M.P.E.P. 201.14(c), acknowledgement is made of applicant's claim for priority based on application filed on 02/19/2021 (CHINA 202110192307.6). Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. 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 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)(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, 3-8, 10-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoon et al. (Pub. No. 2020/0137792 A1 hereinafter Yoon). Regarding claim 1, Yoon discloses “a method comprising: mapping a reference signal to preamble information,” as [(Para. 0159), FIG. 15 illustrates an example of transmitting data by performing mini slot concatenation with the same length as a normal slot when BC holds. Particularly, FIG. 15 illustrates transmission of concatenated mini slots and insertion of a reference signal during a RACH resource duration when BC holds. For example, one data packet may be transmitted throughout a long slot obtained by concatenating mini slots so that the long slot may have the same length as a normal slot. In this case, one data packet is dividedly transmitted in mini slots within the long slot… (Para. 0161), The UE to which the data or control channel of a concatenated mini slot format is allocated in the RACH resource duration should transmit the reference signal of the concatenated mini slot format.] “wherein the preamble information sequentially comprises a first synchronization sequence group part, a first part, a second synchronization sequence group part, and a second part in a time domain,” [(Para. 0063), The sequence part of the RACH preamble (hereinafter, preamble sequence) … (Para. 0203), For example, preamble sequences may be allocated to RACH time/frequency resources as illustrated in FIG. 19… Note: The preamble sequences are interpreted as the first synchronization sequence group part and the second synchronization sequence group part (Para. 0130), RACH preamble may be configured by one CP and a plurality of consecutive preambles as illustrated in FIG. 7(a) or FIG. 8(a)… Note: The CPs are interpreted as the first part and the second part] “wherein a first length of the first part is fixed,” [(Para. 0132), the length of the RACH preamble may be fixed] “wherein the first synchronization sequence group part, the first part, the second synchronization sequence group part, and the second part comprise orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) symbols,” [(Para. 0177), If a RACH slot is partially occupied by SS blocks, the RACH slot may be used for RACH preamble transmission. Here, partial occupation of the RACH slot means that the length of consecutive unoccupied symbols within the slot is equal to or longer than the length of OFDM symbols occupied by a RACH preamble format indicated by the network. Here, the UE calculates symbols which are not used for SS block transmission on the basis of information on actually transmitted SS blocks and determines the number of RACH resources which can be used for PRACH transmission among symbols other than symbols occupied by SS blocks in the slot on the basis of the RACH preamble format. Here, symbols which can be used for PRACH transmission are determined according to the RACH preamble format and a RACH resource start position in the slot is determined by the RACH preamble format and RACH slot type, as shown in FIG. 16.] “wherein the reference signal is mapped to K subcarriers in subcarriers corresponding to at least one of the OFDM symbols in the first part or the second part, and wherein K is a positive integer;” [(Para. 0009), Further, the PRACH configuration information may indicate a frame including the RACH slot, and the number of slots included in the frame may be proportional to the subcarrier spacing] “and sending the preamble information” [(Para. 0240), the network transmits RACH preamble information which can be used per RACH resource to UEs and transmits connected SS block index or CSI-RS index information. Accordingly, when a UE intends to perform RACH transmission in a specific downlink beam direction, the UE can acquire information about RACH time/frequency resources and preamble resources to be used and perform RACH transmission using the resources]. Regarding claim 3, Yoon discloses “further comprising: mapping a synchronization sequence to at least one of the OFDM symbols in the first synchronization sequence group part, wherein the synchronization sequence comprises a first complex number; or mapping the synchronization sequence to at least one of the OFDM symbols in the second synchronization sequence group part, wherein the synchronization sequence comprises a second complex number” as [(Para. 0217-0219), That is, a PRACH configuration signaled by a gNB to a UE may include the following parameters; RACH resource allocation in the time/frequency domain: a preamble format (CP duration and the number of repetitions of a ZC sequence) Sequence information: a root code index, an orthogonal code index (if defined) and a cyclic shift length]. Regarding claim 4, Yoon discloses “wherein the first complex number is mapped to an Nth subcarrier corresponding to the at least one of the OFDM symbols in the first synchronization sequence group part or the second synchronization sequence group part,” as [(Para. 0009), Further, the PRACH configuration information may indicate a frame including the RACH slot, and the number of slots included in the frame may be proportional to the subcarrier spacing] “wherein the reference signal comprises a third complex number that is mapped to the Nth subcarrier, and wherein the third complex number is equal to the first complex number, the third complex number is equal to the second complex number, or the first complex number, the second complex number, and the third complex number are equal” [(Para. 0089), In the NR system, a basic transmission unit is a slot. A slot duration may consist of 14 symbols with a normal cyclic prefix (CP) or 12 symbols with an extended CP. The slot is scaled in time as a function of a used subcarrier spacing. That is, if the subcarrier spacing increases, the length of the slot is shortened. For example, when the number of symbols per slot is 14, the number of slots in a 10-ms frame is 10 at a subcarrier spacing of 15 kHz, 20 at a subcarrier spacing of 30 kHz, and 40 at a subcarrier spacing of 60 kHz. If a subcarrier spacing increases, the length of OFDM symbols is shortened. The number of OFDM symbols in a slot depends on whether the OFDM symbols have a normal CP or an extended CP and does not vary according to subcarrier spacing. A basic time unit used in the LTE system, Ts, is defined as Ts=1/(15000*2048) seconds in consideration of a basic subcarrier spacing of 15 kHz and a maximum TFT size 2048 of the LTE system and corresponds to a sampling time for a subcarrier spacing of 15 kHz. In the NR system, various subcarrier lengths in addition to the subcarrier spacing of 15 kHz may be used. Since the subcarrier spacing and a corresponding time length are inversely proportional, an actual sampling time corresponding to subcarrier spacings greater than 15 kHz is shorter than Ts=1/(15000*2048) seconds. For example, actual sampling times for subcarrier spacings of 30 kHz, 60 kHz, and 120 kHz will be 1/(2*15000*2048) seconds, 1/(4*15000*2048) seconds, and 1/(8*15000*2048) seconds, respectively]. Regarding claim 5, Yoon discloses “wherein the subcarriers correspond to each of the OFDM symbols in the first part or the second part” as [(Para. 0131), The gNB configures RACH resource(s) such that a boundary of each of RACH resources which are to be consecutively used is aligned with a boundary of OFDM symbol(s) which are to be used for the data and control channels]. Regarding claim 6, Yoon discloses “wherein a second length of the second part in the time domain is variable” as [(Para. 0213), A short ZC sequence is used as an NR PRACH preamble. The short ZC sequence may cause lack of sequence in time resources defined as a CP and a RACH preamble. To solve this problem, a plurality of time and frequency resources may be allocated to a RACH resource in a RACH slot, and a gNB needs to signal the quantity of time resources used in the RACH slot in addition to frequency resource information to UEs.]. Regarding claim 7, Yoon discloses “wherein the first part indicates length information of the second part” as [(Para. 0171), Accordingly, it is necessary to provide different pieces of RACH slot configuration information according to RACH preamble subcarrier spacing in order to reduce signaling overhead. That is, M states need to be specified per subcarrier spacing for a RACH preamble, and each state has a RACH slot frequency and/or periodicity within a different predetermined duration. For example, one state may be reserved for a RACH slot having a periodicity of 10 ms in the latter half of a radio frame]. Regarding claim 8, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including “demapping the reference signal from the preamble information” as [(Yoon: Para. 0264), The processor 21 decodes and demodulates the radio signals received through the receive antennas and restores data that the transmitting device 10 intended to transmit…]. Regarding claim 10, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3. Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4. Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5. Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8. Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including “an apparatus comprising: one or more memories configured to store programming instructions” as [(Yoon: Para. 0260), The transmitting device 10 and the receiving device 20 respectively include Radio Frequency (RF) units 13 and 23 capable of transmitting and receiving radio signals carrying information, data, signals, and/or messages, memories 12 and 22 for storing information related to communication in a wireless communication system] “and at least one processor coupled to the one or more memories and configured to execute the programming instructions to cause the apparatus to...” [(Yoon: Para. 0260), processors 11 and 21 operationally connected to elements such as the RF units 13 and 23 and the memories 12 and 22 to control the elements and configured to control the memories 12 and 22 and/or the RF units 13 and 23 so that a corresponding device may perform at least one of the above-described embodiments of the present invention]. Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3. Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4. Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5. Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 6. Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7. 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 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. 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. 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. Claims 2, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2019/0081761 A1 hereinafter Liu). Regarding claim 2, Yoon does not disclose wherein the reference signal is mapped to an 11th subcarrier or a 31st subcarrier in the subcarriers. In an analogous art, Liu teaches “wherein the reference signal is mapped to an 11th subcarrier or a 31st subcarrier in the subcarriers” as [(Para. 0012), As shown in FIG. 5a , group 0 of reference signals is mapped to subcarrier 11]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Youn to provide an effective technique as taught by Liu for using N antenna ports to send cell control reference information on one or more RUs. This may effectively control overheads, and resolve problems of array gains and a coverage area. Further, this may effectively control mutual interference of cell control reference information between cells. In addition, different time-frequency resource locations may be flexibly used to send the cell control reference information, so as to obtain frequency hopping gains [Liu: Para. 0083]. Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2. Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATALI N PASCUAL PEGUERO whose telephone number is (571)272-4691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11AM-9PM. 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, ASAD M NAWAZ can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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. /NATALI PASCUAL PEGUERO/Examiner, Art Unit 2463 /ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 18, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604325
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LOCATION AND TIMING FOR GROUP-COMMON DOWNLINK CONTROL INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12556448
OPTIMIZED RECONFIGURATION OF RLM AND BEAM MONITORING PARAMETERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12531777
OPTIMIZATION OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN NETWORK DEVICES USING WIRELESS REDUNDANCY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12526187
DETERMINING CELL UPGRADE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12512881
2X LTF SEQUENCE FOR 320 MHZ
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 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
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 387 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