Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/531,793

RESUME REQUEST FOLLOWED BY RELEASE AND REDIRECT

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 07, 2023
Examiner
GHOWRWAL, OMAR J
Art Unit
2463
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
691 granted / 815 resolved
+26.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
841
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.4%
+6.4% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 815 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Priority This application, which discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior Application No. 16/489,434, filed June 27, 2019, appears to claim only subject matter directed to an invention that is independent and distinct from that claimed in the prior application, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a divisional application. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. None of the instant claims invokes U.S.C. 112(f). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2019/0320316 A1 to Mildh et al. (“Mildh”). The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. As to claim 1, see similar rejection to claim 4. The apparatus teaches the method. As to claim 4, Mildh discloses a User Equipment (UE) for communicating within a telecommunications network (fig. 11, element 10, UE), the wireless device comprising: a radio interface (fig. 11, element 16, communication interface); one or more processors (fig. 11, element 12, processor); and memory storing instructions executable by the one or more processors, whereby the wireless device is operable to (para. 0243, the memory 14 is operative to store, and the processing circuitry 12 is operative to execute, software which when executed is operative to cause the UE 10 to): receive, by an Access Stratum (AS) layer of the UE and from an application layer or a Non Access Stratum (NAS) layer, of the UE, a request to resume a suspended connection (para. 0161-0163, The UE shall set the contents of RRCResumeRequest message as follows: 1>set the resumeldentity to the stored I-RNTI value provided in suspend; 1>set the resumeCause (i.e. resume means there is a suspension; also: paras. 0162, 0169 “suspend,” “NCC in suspend and new key in RRC Resume Request”) in accordance with the information (i.e. request to resume) received from upper layers (i.e. NAS) or from AS layer (i.e. the use of “or” means it is possible the information [request to resume] may come from both the NAS and AS layers; additionally it is known in the art that in a wireless communication protocol stack, information is passed up/down the stack of layers)); send, by the AS layer and to the telecommunications network, a RRCResumeRequest (para. 0178, 1>submit the RRCResumeRequest message to lower layers (i.e. AS) for transmission); receive, by the AS layer and from the telecommunications network, a RRCRelease with redirection information (para. 0148, UE receives…RRC Release Message…PDCP layer (i.e. AS)…new security context (i.e. redirection)); and perform a cell selection (para. 0179, 1>configure lower layers to resume integrity protection for all radio bearers except SRB0 (i.e. cell selection) using the previously configured algorithm and the temporary K.sub.RRCint key and temporary K.sub.UPint key immediately, i.e., integrity protection shall be applied to all subsequent messages received and sent by the UE; para. 0181, UE shall continue cell re-selection) without first entering a Radio Resource Control (RRC) CONNECTED state [Examiner notes: as this limitation is not in the cited prior art, the cited prior art meets this negative limitation]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3, 5-6 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR J GHOWRWAL whose telephone number is (571)270-5691. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-6:00pm. 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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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. /OMAR J GHOWRWAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598593
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR SWITCHING BETWEEN FREQUENCY DOMAIN RESOURCES, AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593319
BANDWIDTH PART (BWP) SWITCH REQUEST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593321
FREQUENCY DOMAIN RESOURCES FOR IAB
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581513
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR RESOURCE SELECTION OF SIDELINK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574914
RX-TX TIME DIFFERENCE REPORTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
99%
With Interview (+30.3%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 815 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