Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/505,825

COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Nov 09, 2023
Examiner
THOMPSON, JR, OTIS L
Art Unit
2477
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Kyocera Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
890 granted / 1002 resolved
+30.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1034
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§112
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1002 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed February 12, 2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-3 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The new ground of rejection is found in Chou (US 2023/0403537), which was previously cited on the USPTO-892 dated November 12, 2025 but not relied upon in rejection. 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. 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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson (“Open Issues for UEs in Idle or Inactive Mode”, IDS Reference) in view of Guo et al. (US 2018/0192255) in view of Chou (US 2023/0403537). Regarding claim 1, Ericsson discloses a communication control method performed by a user equipment (Section 2.2, UE) in a mobile communication system configured to provide broadcast/multicast services (MBS) from a network to the user equipment (Section 2.2, multicast session for the UE to receive MBS data), the communication control method comprising: monitoring, in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) idle state or an RRC inactive state, a group notification indicating that an MBS multicast session that the user equipment has joined is activated (Section 2.2, group 5G S-TMSI is assigned to the UE when…when the UE joins the multicast group…when the UE is in idle of inactive mode, the UE will monitor this group 5G S-TMSI for session activation) the group notification being transmitted from the network to a group where the user equipment belongs (Section 2.2, when the UE receives a paging message including this group 5G S-TMSI the UE knows that the multicast session is about to start); in response to receiving the group notification, transitioning to an RRC connected state for reception of the MBS multicast session (Section 2.2, after reception of the group 5G S-TMSI the UE transitions to connected mode to receive the multicast session). Ericsson further discloses that the UE triggers MBMSInterestIndication message when its interest has changed and uses this message to indicate its interest to receive or no longer receive the multicast session from the gNB (Section 5.1). Ericsson does not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Guo et al.: in response to the user equipment leaving (i.e., no longer interested [Ericsson]) the MBS multicast session, controlling to not perform the monitoring of the group notification (Guo et al., Paragraphs 145 and 156, The UE stops monitoring broadcast or multicast when the UE is no longer interested in any broadcast or multicast service or session of all interested broadcast). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ericsson with the cited disclosure from Guo et al. in order for NR to support different broadcast or multicast services using different numerologies to achieve successful transmission of broadcast or multicast service (Guo et al. Paragraph 157). Ericsson in view of Guo et al. do not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Chou: controlling to not perform the monitoring of an RNTI (Radio Network Temporary Identifier) dedicated to the group notification (Chou, Paragraphs 70 and 73-74, UE is interested in receiving a second MBS service, the UE stops monitoring/receiving DCIs with the G-RNTI 1 and starts monitoring/receiving DCIs with the G-RNTI 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Ericsson and Guo et al. with the cited disclosure from Chou in order to allow a UE to specifically monitor or not monitor G-RNTIs of MBS services in accordance with UE interests in those services (Chou, Paragraphs 70 and 73-74). Regarding claim 2, the functional limitations are rejected for similar reasons set forth in rejecting claim 1 above. The prior art additionally discloses a user equipment (Ericsson, Section 2.2 UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, 300)…comprising: a controller configured to monitor and control (Ericsson, controller is inherent in the UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, CPU 308), and a receiver configured to receive (Ericsson, receiver is inherent in the UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, transceiver 314). Regarding claim 3, the functional limitations are rejected for similar reasons set forth in rejecting claim 1 above. The prior art additionally discloses an apparatus configured to control a user equipment (Ericsson, Section 2.2 UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, 300)…the apparatus comprising: a processor (Ericsson, controller is inherent in the UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, CPU 308), and a memory (Ericsson, memory is inherent in the UE; Guo et al., Figure 3, memory 310) configured to perform the function limitations. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 OTIS L THOMPSON, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30am - 7:00pm. 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, Chirag G. Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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. /OTIS L THOMPSON, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 March 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 09, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 05, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 05, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 12, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598492
TERMINAL, RADIO COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND BASE STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593318
TIME DOMAIN PATTERN SWITCHING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587877
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING A POOR NETWORK QUALITY AREA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574321
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FACILITATING ROUTING OF LEVEL 1 NUMBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568010
FREQUENCY DOMAIN MULTIPLEXING OF A DATA SIGNAL AND A REFERENCE SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1002 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