Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/476,741

Latency Reduction for Primary Cell Switching

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 28, 2023
Examiner
BLAIR, DOUGLAS B
Art Unit
2454
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Comcast Cable Communications LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 1m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
463 granted / 634 resolved
+15.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
684
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§103
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 634 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 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 inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: The MAC CE is defined as comprising data as “a field” and an action of “switching”. It is not clear how an instance of data such as “a field” is related to an action of “switching” in order to define “the MAC CE” as it is not clear whether “the MAC CE” is intended to be a data structure or a procedure. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the candidate cells" in the “a first field” limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The applicant previously references “configuration parameters of candidate cells for layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure)” but does not define particular candidate cells that can be referred to with the article the and that would be defined by a quantity, as claimed. Claim 17 recites the limitation "the first quantity of candidate cells" in the “a first field” limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The applicant previously recites “one or more parameters of a first quantity of candidate cells” but does not define any actual “first quantity of candidate cells” that can be subsequently referred to. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0030480 by Kung et al. As to claim 1, Kung teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a wireless device, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) triggering a layer 1_or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure (ref. no. 808) wherein the MAC CE comprises: a field, comprising a first quantity of bits, indicating a first candidate cell among candidate cells, wherein the first quantity of bits is based on a quantity of the candidate cells (paragraphs 166 and 172); and switching, during the LTM procedure, a source cell to the first candidate cell (paragraph 339, the procedure implemented after step 816). As to claim 12, Kung teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a wireless device and via a source cell, one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages comprising configuration parameters of candidate cells for a layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure (ref. no. 808);receiving a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (step 816) triggering the LTM procedure, wherein the MAC CE comprises: a first field, comprising a first quantity of bits, indicating a first candidate cell among the candidate cells, wherein the first quantity of bits corresponds to a quantity of the candidate cells (paragraphs 166 and 172); and a second field comprising a timing advance command (TAC) (paragraphs 260, 280, and 298); and transmitting, via a primary cell (PCell) and based on switching from the source cell to the first candidate cell for the LTM procedure, uplink signals using the TAC (paragraphs 339 and 298, the procedure involved in paragraph 339, after step 816, can use the TAC referenced in paragraph 298). As to claim 2, see rejection of claim 12. As to claims 4 and 14, see paragraph 339. As to claim 5, see paragraphs 168 and 175. As to claims 7 and 15, see paragraph 339, the switching “releases” any parameters related to the no longer used source cell 806. As to claim 9, see paragraphs 81 and 327. As to claims 11 and 16, see paragraphs 267, 301, and 308. As to claim 13, see paragraphs 171-175. 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) 3, 6, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0030480 by Kung et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2018/0324635 by Babai et al. As to claim 17, Kung teaches a method comprising: receiving, by a wireless device via a first cell, one or more parameters of a first quantity of candidate cells for a layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure (ref. no. 808); receiving a control element triggering the LTM procedure (ref. no. 816), wherein the control element comprises: a first field, comprising a second quantity of bits, indicating a second cell of the first quantity of candidate cells, wherein the second quantity is determined based on the first quantity (paragraphs 166 and 172); and a field indicating a timing advanced command (TAC) (paragraphs 260, 280, and 298); and switching a primary cell (PCell) from the first cell to the second cell, and transmitting, based on the TAC and via the second cell, at least one transport block (paragraphs 339 and 298, the procedure involved in paragraph 339, after step 816, can use the TAC referenced in paragraph 298); however Kung does not explicitly teach that the MAC CE comprises: a second field indicating whether to skip performing a random access (RA) procedure on the second cell; wherein the switching is based on the second field indicating to skip performing the RA procedure, and wherein the switching comprises: skipping performing the RA procedure. Babai teaches a MAC CE comprises: a second field indicating whether to skip performing a random access (RA) procedure on the second cell (paragraph 228); wherein the switching is based on the second field indicating to skip performing the RA procedure, and wherein the switching comprises: skipping performing the RA procedure (paragraph 228-230). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mobility management art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Kung regarding managing mobility using a MAC CE with the teachings of Babai regarding including a field to indicate skipping a RA procedure in a MAC CE because the modification would provide the benefits discussed in paragraph 228-230 of Babai without requiring any modification to the inventive concept of Kung. As to claims 3 and 6, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claim 17. As to claim 18, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claims 4 and 14. As to claim 19, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claims 5 and 15. As to claim 20, it is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 5. Claim(s) 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0030480 by Kung et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0046510 by Kung et al. As to claim 8, Kung 1 teaches the subject matter of claim 1; however; Kung 1 does not explicitly teach the inclusion of an SSB index in the MAC CE. Kung 2 teaches the inclusion of an SSB index in the MAC CE (paragraph 435). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mobility management art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Kung 1 regarding managing mobility using a MAC CE with the teachings of Kung 2 inclusion of an SSB index in the MAC CE because both publications are by the same inventor and directed to the same implementation environment and features so their combination is self-evident. As to claim 10, see paragraphs 81 and 327 of Kung 1 and paragraph 435 of Kung 2. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS B BLAIR whose telephone number is (571)272-3893. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm. 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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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. /DOUGLAS B BLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 28, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598655
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MANAGING SESSION BY CONSIDERING BACKHAUL INFORMATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12563127
INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556421
PARALLEL ONLINE MEETINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12526344
SERVICE LAYER METHODS FOR OFFLOADING IOT APPLICATION MESSAGE GENERATION AND RESPONSE HANDLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12506630
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND USER EQUIPMENT
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
73%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+7.0%)
4y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 634 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