Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/529,775

TERMINAL AND RECEPTION POWER MEASUREMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Priority
Aug 05, 2011 — JP 2011-171710 +5 more
Examiner
LI, NING
Art Unit
2415
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
12m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
106 granted / 155 resolved
+10.4% vs TC avg
Strong +48% interview lift
Without
With
+48.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
174
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
95.0%
+55.0% vs TC avg
§102
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§112
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 155 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Status of Claims This Office Action is in response to claims filed on 12/5/2023. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 1, 6 and 11; claims 1, 6 and 11 recite wherein the signal is received in response to at least one of a first value or a second value being greater than a threshold. The specification discloses a UE transmits a measurement result corresponding to a CSI-RS configuration when the measurement result is equal to or higher than a predefined threshold (see paragraph [0079]). The decision of at least one of a first value or a second value being greater than a threshold is made at the UE. Therefore, the claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification. Regarding claims 2-5; claims 2-5 are dependent claims of claim 1, therefore inherit the 35 U.S.C 112, first paragraph issues of the independent claim. Regarding claims 7-10; claims 7-10 are dependent claims of claim 6, therefore inherit the 35 U.S.C 112, first paragraph issues of the independent claim. Regarding claims 12-14; claims 12-14 are dependent claims of claim 11, therefore inherit the 35 U.S.C 112, first paragraph issues of the independent claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 – (e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language. Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Marinier et al. (US 2013/0003788 A1; provisional application number 61/480,675). Regarding claims 1, 6 and 11; Marinier discloses transmitting, by Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling, a Channel State Information Reference Signal (CSI-RS) candidate list including a first CSI-RS configuration and a second CSI-RS configuration, each of the first CSI-RS configuration and the second CSI-RS configuration including a CSI-RS individual offset (a WTRU may be configured with multiple CSI-RS resources for the purpose of CSI evaluation and reporting via RRC signaling; an index may be associated with each CSI-RS-resource in the configuration; each CSI-RS resource corresponds to a transmission point; see paragraphs [0066], [0075], [0086], [0298] and Fig. 1A); and receiving a signal including at least one of a measurement result corresponding to the first CSI-RS configuration or a measurement result corresponding to the second CSI-RS configuration (the WTRU may report the index together with the associated CSI report to a base station; see paragraph [0086] and Fig. 1A), wherein the signal is received in response to at least one of a first value or a second value being greater than a threshold, the first value being equal to the measurement result corresponding to the first CSI-RS configuration offset by the CSI-RS individual offset included in the first CSI-RS configuration, the second value being equal to the measurement result corresponding to the second CSI-RS configuration offset by the CSI-RS individual offset included in the second CSI-RS configuration (the WTRU may report CSI for the CSI-RS-resources for which the values of an associated metric may be above a certain threshold; an index may be associated with each CSI-RS-resource; the WTRU may report this index together with the associated CSI report; the associated metric may be representative of the quality of a signal received from the corresponding transmission point; see paragraphs [0066], [0075], [0081], [0086] and [0311]). Specifically for claim 1; Marinier discloses an integrated circuit comprising: circuitry (the base station may communicate with a WTRU over an air interface; see paragraph [0021] and Fig. 1A). Specifically for claim 6; Marinier discloses a base station comprising: a transmitter and a receiver (a base station may transmit signal to and receive signal from a WTRU; see paragraph [0031] and Fig. 1A). Regarding claims 4, 9 and 14; Marinier discloses wherein the first CSI-RS configuration includes CSI-RS configuration information of a first transmission point, and the second CSI-RS configuration includes CSI-RS configuration information of a second transmission point (a WTRU may be configured with multiple CSI-RS resources for the purpose of CSI evaluation and reporting via RRC signaling; an index may be associated with each CSI-RS-resource in the configuration; each CSI-RS resource corresponds to a transmission point; therefore, a CSI-RS configuration is for a transmission point; see paragraphs [0066], [0075] and [0086]). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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. Claims 2, 7 and 12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marinier; in view of Kim et al. (WO 2011/115421 A2). Regarding claims 2, 7 and 12; Marinier discloses a base station transmits CSI-RS configurations to a UE. Marinier does not explicitly disclose the CSI-RS configuration include a CSI-RS configuration ID and a time/frequency resource position in a subframe. Kim discloses wherein each of the first CSI-RS configuration and the second CSI-RS configuration includes a CSI-RS configuration identification (ID) and a time/frequency resource position in a subframe (the CSI-RS configuration may specify the index of a downlink subframe carrying CSI-RSs, the time-frequency positions of the CSI-RS REs in the downlink subframe, a cell ID; see lines 11-25, page 36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Marinier and Kim to include a CSI-RS configuration ID, a resource position in a subframe and a cell ID in a CSI-RS configuration in order to indicate a CSI-RS configuration selected for use (see lines 22-25, page 36). Claims 3, 8 and 13 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marinier; in view of Pedersen et al. (US 20130336154 A1). Regarding claims 3, 8 and 13; Marinier discloses a WTRU reports CSI for which the values of an associated metric are above a certain threshold. Marinier does not explicitly disclose the threshold is indicated by an RRC signaling. Pedersen discloses wherein the threshold is indicated by the RRC signaling (the threshold value for signal measurement may be signaled to the UE via RRC signaling; see paragraph [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Marinier and Pedersen to transmit the threshold via RRC signaling to be part of configuration parameters for the UE (see paragraph [0053] of Pedersen). Claims 5, 10 and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marinier; in view of Yang et al. (US 9497713 B2). Regarding claims 5, 10 and 15; Marinier discloses a WTRU may be configured with a measurement object and/or reporting configuration for CSI-RS. Marinier does not explicitly disclose the measurement object message indicate measurement for CRS. Yang discloses wherein the CSI-RS candidate list is included in a measurement object message, and the measurement object message indicates measurement targets of cell specific reference signals (CRSs) (a UE receives reference signal configuration IE from each RP (reception point) in the RP set; in response to the RP set information, the UE measures the RSRP of the corresponding downlink reference signal; each RP configuration IE includes cell ID, reference signal type etc.; in LTE and LTE-A with CoMP, the downlink reference signal type may be CRS, CSI-RS; in earlier LTE and LTE-A systems, CRS is used for measurement; RP set configuration is transmitted in a message via higher layer signaling; see lines 24-27, col. 1; lines 52-67, col. 4, lines 1-36, col. 5; Fig. 2, Fig. 4-Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Marinier and Yang to include the reference signals for RSRP measurement in a measurement object message for measurement using CRSs in order to support earlier LTE/LTE-A system (backward compatible) (see lines 24-27, col. 1). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NING LI whose telephone number is (571)270-0624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, Thursday 8:30am - 5:00pm. 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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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. /N.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2415 /MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677163
CROSS-SUBSCRIPTION MEASUREMENTS FOR A USER EQUIPMENT
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12647161
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR BEAM MANAGEMENT IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
3y 6m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12641553
METHOD OF TRANSMITTING/RECEIVING A SIGNAL SET AND APPARATUS THEREOF
3y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12542626
METHODS PROVIDING SIDELINK HARQ AT ACCESS STRATUM AND RELATED WIRELESS DEVICES
4y 4m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12520169
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ADAPTIVELY APPLYING INTERFERENCE MITIGATION ALGORITHM IN MOBILE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
3y 2m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+48.1%)
3y 7m (~12m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 155 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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