Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/516,380

Wireless Communication System

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 21, 2023
Examiner
GONZALES, APRIL GUZMAN
Art Unit
2648
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Fractal Networks LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
718 granted / 844 resolved
+23.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
870
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
50.0%
+10.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.4%
-33.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 844 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 2, 4-6, 15-16, and 18 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 2 recites the limitation "the edge processing module" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the processor" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the edge processing module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the edge processing module" in line 1 and line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the edge processing module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the edge processing module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 18 recites the limitation "the edge learning machine" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Objections Claims 9-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims appear to be numbered incorrectly. There appears to be no Claim 8 in the claim sheet. Therefore claims 9-20 should be renumbered to claims 8-19 respectively. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1, 7, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2017/0064616 A1 herein Park). Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a system (read as system 500) (Park – Figure 5, [0078]), comprising: a transceiver (read as transceiver 430) (Park – Figure 4, [0015], [0073], [0076], [0078]) to communicate with a predetermined target (read as at least one wireless device 115) (Park – Figure 4, Figure 5, [0076]-[0078]); one or more antennas coupled to the transceiver each electrically or mechanically steerable to the predetermined target (read as antennas 435) (Park – Figure 4, Figure 5, [0075]-[0076]); and an AI processing module coupled to the transceiver and one or more antennas to provide low-latency computation for the predetermined target based on AI determination (read as edge computing platform 215-a, 215-b) (Park – Figure 4, [0069], [0073], [0075]). Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the transceiver comprises a 5G or 6G cellular transceiver (read as wireless device 115 may be a cellular phone) (Park – [0038]). Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1, Park further teaches comprising one or more cameras and sensors in the housing to capture security information (read as a sensor or other input device of the edge computing device 145 such as temperature sensor, light sensor, or camera) (Park – [0049]). Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 1, Park further teaches comprising a camera for individual identity identification (read as a sensor or other input device of the edge computing device 145 such as temperature sensor, light sensor, or camera) (Park – [0049]). Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the edge processing module streams data to the predetermined target to minimize loading the target (read as up stream, down stream, video streaming) (Park – [0005], [0070]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6, 11, 13, 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 9-10 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 9, the best prior art of record found during the examination of the present application, Park et al. (US 2017/0064616 A1 herein Park), fails to specifically teach, suggest, or disclose a system, comprising: a transceiver to communicate with a predetermined target; one or more antennas coupled to the transceiver each electrically or mechanically steerable to the predetermined target; and a beam sweeping module controlling the antenna in accordance with one of: a service level agreement, a performance requirement, a traffic distribution data, a networking requirement or prior beam sweeping history. Park teaches providing small cell computing resources as a service, wherein a base station in the small cell is co-located with an edge computing device providing the small cell computing resources. The method may further include hosting an application on the small cell computing resources of the edge computing device, the application accessible to a mobile device in the small cell (Park – Abstract). Park teaches a wireless communications system 100A. The wireless communications system 100A includes base stations 105, wireless devices 115, and a core network 130. The core network 130 may provide user authentication, access authorization, tracking, Internet Protocol (IP) connectivity, and other access, routing, or mobility functions. The base stations 105 interface with the core network 130 through backhaul links 132 (Park – Figure 1A, [0032]). These teachings of Park differ and fall short of the present application, therefore claim 9 is considered novel and non-obvious over the prior art and therefore is allowed. Claim 10 depends upon allowable claim 9 therefore this claim is also allowed for the same reasons explained above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL GUZMAN GONZALES whose telephone number is (571)270-1101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm 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, Wesley L. Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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. /APRIL G GONZALES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 21, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587817
BLUETOOTH CONNECTION METHOD AND APPARATUS, WEARABLE DEVICE, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587886
NETWORK DRIVE TESTING BASED ON POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12555896
TRANSPARENT ANTENNA AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556292
TRACKING EXTRA-VEHICULAR TECHNICIAN PROGRESS IN A NETWORK MONITORING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12538137
ACTIVE ANTENNA SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+6.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 844 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