Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/491,430

POWER AND TRAFFIC OPTIMIZED METHODS OF OPERATING RF ACCESS SYSTEMS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 20, 2023
Examiner
BROWN, VERNAL U
Art Unit
2686
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Nxp B V
OA Round
3 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
817 granted / 1173 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
1222
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1173 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to communication filed 1/02/26. Response to Amendment The examiner acknowledges the amendment of claims 1,5-6,13,15. Response to Arguments Applicants argued that the prior art of Ledvina and Tertinek is silent on teaching the limitation of operating the anchor in a second mode, the second mode comprising second ranging operations for determining a second ranging result or the anchor relative to the key. It is the examiner’s position that the reference of Ledvina teaches performing a first and second ranging operation between the anchor (vehicle antenna) and the key device between (fig. 1, paragraph 023-024), Tertinek teaches the use of UWB-based radar for performing the ranging function based on radar signal reflection by the target object (paragraph 035, 050). the first ranging result fulfils the predetermined condition, operating the anchor in a second mode, the second mode comprising second RF ranging operations for determining a second ranging result for the anchor relative to the key device, and RF operations for determining a result for the anchor relative to a holder of the key device (paragraph 074). The reference of Tertinek is relied upon for teaching determining the position information associated with the key device based on the second ranging result and the radar ranging result (the radar is used to detect the moving human being, the detection of the kicking action and location of the mobile device is used to operate the vehicle trunk, paragraph 035). Claim Objections Claims 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 18-20 depends on cancelled claim 7. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 1-5, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ledvina et al. US Patent Application Publication 20190135229 in view of Tertinek US Patent Application Publication 20230156429. Regarding claim 1, Ledvina teaches a method of operating an RF access system, the system comprising an anchor (antennas on vehicle, fig.2) arranged at a predetermined location and configured to communicate with one or more key devices (paragraph 033) the method comprising: operating the anchor in a first mode, the first mode comprising first RF ranging operations for determining a first ranging result for the anchor relative to a key device (paragraph 068); determining whether the first ranging result fulfills a predetermined condition (measured distance and authentication, paragraph 063); if the first ranging result fulfils the predetermined condition, operating the anchor in a second mode, the second mode comprising second RF ranging operations for determining a second ranging result for the anchor relative to the key device, and RF operations for determining a result for the anchor relative to a holder of the key device (paragraph 074); and determining position information associated with the key device based on the second ranging result (paragraph 073-074). Ledvina teaches the used of UWB signal for ranging but is silent on teaching performing a radar operation determining the position information associated with the key device based on the second ranging result and the radar result. the use of radar signal for ranging. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches performing a ranging operation using UWB signal and performing a radar operation (paragraph 035, 050). the use of UWB-based radar for performing the ranging function based on radar signal reflection by the target object (paragraph 035, 050). Tertinek teaches determining the position information associated with the key device based on the second ranging result and the radar ranging result (the radar is used to detect the moving human being, the detection of the kicking action and location of the mobile device is used to operate the vehicle trunk, paragraph 035) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range and further representing the improvement of the system of Ledvina by combing the result of the ranging operation and the radar operation to operate the vehicle trunk. . Regarding claim 2, Ledvina teaches the first ranging result comprises a first plurality of distance estimates, each distance estimate being indicative of an estimated distance between the anchor and the key device (paragraph 068), and wherein the second ranging result comprises a second plurality of distance estimates, each distance estimate being indicative of an estimated distance between the anchor and the key device (paragraph 074). Regarding claim 3, Ledvina is silent on teaching the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device (paragraph 049). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one distance measurement means for another and producing the predictable result of determining the distance between the mobile device and the anchor device. Regarding claim 4, Ledvina teaches the result comprises a plurality of position estimates indicative of a position of the holder of the key device relative to the anchor (paragraph 063). Ledvina teaches the used of UWB signal for ranging but is silent on teaching the use of radar signal for ranging. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the use of UWB-based radar for performing the ranging function (paragraph 035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range. Regarding claim 5, Ledvina teaches determining the position information comprises identifying one or more distance estimate (paragraph 030-031). Ledvina is silent on teaching the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device (paragraph 049). Tertinek teaches determining that the second ranging result matches the radar result by determining that the mobile device is in the proximity of the vehicle and the radar detect the kicking action of the user behind the bumper in order to open the trunk (paragraph 035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range and further representing the improvement of the system of Ledvina by combing the result of the ranging operation and the radar operation to operate the vehicle trunk. . Regarding claim 14, Ledvina teaches operating the anchor or respectively the plurality of anchors in an initial mode in order to establish communication with the key device via another RF communication channel prior to operating anchor or respectively the anchors in the first mode (pairing mode, paragraph 034). Regarding claim 15, Ledvina teaches an RF access system, comprising: at least one anchor arranged at a predetermined location (antennas on vehicle, fig.2)and configured to communicate with one or more key devices (paragraph 033); and a controller (ECU) in communication with the at least one anchor, wherein the at least one anchor and the controller are configured to perform ranging (paragraph 053,064). operate the anchor in a first mode, the first mode comprising first RF ranging operations for determining a first ranging result for the anchor relative to a key device (two different wireless protocol is used for ranging, paragraph 03,018,068); determine whether the first ranging result fulfills a predetermined condition (authentication and coarse ranging is first conducted with BLE, measured distance, paragraph 018,063,0120); when the first ranging result fulfils the predetermined condition, operate the anchor in a second mode, the second mode comprising second RF ranging operations for determining a second ranging result for the anchor relative to the key device (second protocol using UWB is used for ranging, paragraph 021-022,030,045-046,074). Ledvina teaches determining position information associated with the key device based on the second ranging result (paragraph 073-074). Ledvina teaches the used of UWB signal for ranging but is silent on teaching the use of radar signal for ranging. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the use of UWB-based radar for performing the ranging function based on radar signal reflection by the target object (paragraph 035, 050). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range. Regarding claim 16, Ledvina teaches the UWB measurement result comprises a plurality of position estimates indicative of a position of the holder of the key device relative to the anchor (fig. 4, paragraph 074,114). Ledvina teaches the used of UWB signal for ranging but is silent on teaching the use of radar signal for ranging. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the use of UWB-based radar for performing the ranging function based on radar signal reflection by the target object (paragraph 035, 050). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range. Regarding claim 17, Ledvina teaches determining the position information comprises identifying one or more distance estimate (paragraph 030-031). Ledvina is silent on teaching the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device. Tertinek in an analogous art teaches the second ranging result further comprises a plurality of angle estimates, each angle estimate being indicative of an angle between the anchor and the key device (paragraph 049). Tertinek teaches determining that the second ranging result matches the radar result by determining that the mobile device is in the proximity of the vehicle and the radar detect the kicking action of the user behind the bumper in order to open the trunk (paragraph 035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Ledvina as disclosed by Tertinek because such modification represents the substitution of one frequency band for another for producing the expected result of detecting objects over the desired range and further representing the improvement of the system of Ledvina by combing the result of the ranging operation and the radar operation to operate the vehicle trunk. . . Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 6,8-13, the prior art of record is silent on teaching selecting an anchor of the subset of anchors based on one or more signal parameters; placing the other anchors of the subset into a standby mode; Second RF ranging operation for determining a second ranging result for the selected anchor. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERNAL U BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571 270 1210. 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. /VERNAL U BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 20, 2023
Application Filed
May 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 15, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 02, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604195
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DUAL LAYER AUDIO DEVICE PAIRING AUTHENTICATION WITH VOICE PATTERN RECOGNITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585899
AUTOMATED SECURE ALLOCATION OF SCANNING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12566833
CRITICAL AREA SAFETY DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12555424
DATACENTER DETECTION AND AUTHENTICATION TECHNIQUES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12540491
ELECTRONIC LOCK SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+10.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1173 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