Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/463,693

NEUTRAL HOST ARCHITECTURE FOR A DISTRIBUTED ANTENNA SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112§DP
Filed
Sep 08, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, BRIAN D
Art Unit
2475
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Dali Wireless Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1184 granted / 1281 resolved
+34.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1309
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§103
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1281 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 4 recites the limitation "for each each band module” in line 2 is unclear. Claim 5 recites the limitation "for each each band module” in line 2 is unclear. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,297,603. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the elements claimed in claims 1-2 are described in claims 1 and 8 of 11,297,603 except that the signal to be processed is in the opposite direction. Claims 1-2 are, therefore, obvious in view of claims 1 and 8 of 11,297,603. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 would be allowable if a terminal disclaimer is timely filed or the applicant can include all the limitations of dependent claims 3 to 5 (6 depends on 5) in independent claim 1 without a terminal disclaimer. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 4 of the remarks, filed 12/15/25, with respect to claims 1-2 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102 rejection of claims 1-2 has been withdrawn. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3084. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30. 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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at 571-270-3770. 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. /BRIAN D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Dec 16, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Jul 15, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Dec 15, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598592
RESERVATION OF FDD FREQUENCIES FOR REDUCED CAPABILITY DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598594
METHOD, DEVICE AND COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM OF COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597973
MITIGATING IMPACTS OF ACCESSORIES ON MILLIMETER WAVE COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593320
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587330
Flexible Downlink Control Channel Monitoring for Downlink Repetitions
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+5.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1281 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