Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/543,436

OPTIMAL SPLITTER PRECODING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
VAN ROIE, JUSTIN T
Art Unit
2469
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
285 granted / 345 resolved
+24.6% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+40.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
390
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 345 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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. 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. Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 15, 18-19, and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murakami et al. US 2020/0145067 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Murakami”). As to claim 1, Murakami teaches an apparatus for wireless communication by a network entity (¶¶1147-1148, 1155, and 1157; figures 1 and 35), comprising: one or more processors individually or collectively configured to execute instructions on one or more memories and to cause the network entity to (¶¶326-327, 1147-1148, 1155, and 1157; figures 1 and 35): transmit, to a user equipment (UE), a request for a demodulation capability of the UE (¶¶1157-1158 and 1188; figure 35: AP transmits, to UE, request to determine UE’s reception and demodulation capability); receive, from the UE after transmitting the request, a first message indicating the demodulation capability of the UE (¶¶1158-1159, 1179, and 1185-1188; figures 35 and 37: AP receives, from UE, reception capability notification symbol indicating UE’s reception and demodulation capability for receiving data stream(s)); apply a first precoder, selected based on the demodulation capability of the UE, to a first downlink signal for transmission to the UE (¶¶1151, 1159, and 1188; figure 35: perform precoding on a plurality of streams of modulated signals based on schemes and methods determined based on the received UE reception capability notification symbol); and transmit the precoded first downlink signal to the UE on a wireless channel using one or more groups of transmission streams comprising a first number of transmission streams (¶¶1151, 1160, and 1188; figure 35: transmit the precoded plurality of streams of modulated signals). As to claim 4, Murakami teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the demodulation capability of the UE indicates a first maximum number of transmission streams that the UE is capable of simultaneously demodulating (¶¶1158-1159, 1188, 2891, and 2896: indicates maximum number of streams that can be received and demodulated). As to claim 5, Murakami teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the first maximum number of transmission streams that the UE is capable of simultaneously demodulating is less than the first number of transmission streams (¶¶3106-3109: UE indicates 1, 2, or 4 and the AP has 8 streams). As to claim 15, Murakami teaches an apparatus for wireless communication by a user equipment (UE) (¶¶814, 817, 1155, and 1158; figures 24 and 35), comprising: one or more processors individually or collectively configured to execute instructions on one or more memories and to cause the network entity to (¶¶326-327, 814, 817, 1155, and 1158; figures 24 and 35): receive, from a network entity, a request for a demodulation capability of the UE (¶¶1157-1158 and 1188; figure 35: AP transmits, and UE receives, request to determine UE’s reception and demodulation capability); transmit, to the network entity after receiving the request, a first message indicating the demodulation capability of the UE (¶¶1158-1159, 1179, and 1185-1188; figures 35 and 37: AP receives, and UE transmits, reception capability notification symbol indicating UE’s reception and demodulation capability for receiving data stream(s)); receive, from the network entity, a first downlink signal transmitted on a wireless channel using one or more groups of transmission streams comprising a number of transmission streams (¶¶1151, 1160, and 1188; figure 35: receive, from the AP, the precoded plurality of streams of modulated signals), wherein: the first downlink signal is precoded based on a first precoder; and the first precoder is based on the demodulation capability of the UE (¶¶1151, 1159, and 1188; figure 35: perform precoding on a plurality of streams of modulated signals based on schemes and methods determined based on the received UE reception capability notification symbol); and demodulate the first downlink signal using a first demodulator corresponding to the first precoder (¶¶1158-1161, 1187-1188, and 1243; figures 24, 35, and 41: UE demodulates downlink signal according to the precoder according to the indicated UE capability). As to claim 18, claim 18 is rejected the same way as claim 4. As to claim 19, claim 19 is rejected the same way as claim 5. As to claim 29, claim 29 is rejected the same way as claim 1. As to claim 30, claim 30 is rejected the same way as claim 15. 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) 6 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami in view of Xue et al. US 2021/0211169 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Xue”). As to claim 6, Murakami teaches the apparatus of claim 5. Although Murakami teaches “The apparatus of claim 5,” Murakami does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first…sub-channels”. However, Xue teaches wherein the first precoder comprises a precoder that, when applied to the first downlink signal and the first downlink signal is transmitted on the wireless channel, is configured to block-diagonalize the wireless channel into a plurality of separate sub-channels (¶85: apply block-diagonalized precoding on downlink signaling). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Murakami by including “wherein the first…sub-channels” as taught by Xue because it provides Murakami’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of suppressing interference (Xue, ¶85). As to claim 20, claim 20 is rejected the same way as claim 6. Claim(s) 11 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami in view of Zhang US 2018/0310287 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Zhang”). As to claim 11, Murakami teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein: the first maximum number of transmission streams that the UE is capable of simultaneously demodulating is greater than or equal to the first number of transmission streams (¶¶3071, 3080, 3106-3109, 3184, 3187, 3200, and 3202: UE supports the 8 data streams). Although Murakami teaches “The apparatus…transmission streams,” Murakami does not explicitly disclose “the first precoder comprises a singular value decomposition (SVD) precoder”. However, Zhang teaches the first precoder comprises a singular value decomposition (SVD) precoder (¶154: SVD precoder). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Murakami by including “the first precoder comprises a singular value decomposition (SVD) precoder” as taught by Zhang because it provides Murakami’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of avoiding interference (Zhang, ¶¶154-155). As to claim 25, claim 25 is rejected the same way as claim 11. Claim(s) 14 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami in view of Qiao et al. US 2025/0168688 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Qiao”). As to claim 14, Murakami teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Although Murakami teaches “The apparatus of claim 1,” Murakami does not explicitly disclose “wherein at least…a MAC-CE”. However, Qiao teaches wherein at least one of: the one or more processors are configured to cause the network entity to transmit the request to the UE in a media access control-control element (MAC-CE); or the one or more processors are configured to cause the network entity to receive the first message from the UE in a MAC-CE (¶137; figure 3E: base station requests UE capability and UE transmits UE capability via MAC CE signaling). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Murakami by including “wherein at least…a MAC-CE” as taught by Qiao because it provides Murakami’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of acquiring real-time UE capabilities/requirements (Qiao, ¶137). As to claim 28, claim 28 is rejected the same way as claim 14. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3, 7-10, 12-13, 16-17, 21-24, and 26-27 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: 3GPP TS 36.311 V17.6.0 Wang et al., US 2025/0133470 A1 – Handover Processing Method and Apparatus, and Communication Device Zhao et al., US 2025/0088314 A1 – Wireless Communication Method, Terminal Device, and Network Device You et al., US 2025/0080974 A1 – Method for Reporting UE Capability, and Devices Watts et al., US 2024/0357631 A1 – Methods and Apparatus to Support Large Scale QoS State Transition Liu et al., US 2024/0340667 A1 – Method Executed by User Equipment, Method Executed by Network Node, and Storage Medium Rahman et al., US 2022/0200670 A1 – Method and Apparatus for Robust MIMO Transmission Li et al., US 2021/0400468 A1 – Connectivity Enhancement Ryu et al., US 2021/0243750 A1 – Techniques for Indicating a User Equipment Capability for Simultaneous Beam Update Across Multiple Component Carriers Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN T VAN ROIE whose telephone number is (571)270-0308. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:30pm. 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, Ian N Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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. /JUSTIN T VAN ROIE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598476
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATION MODE ON UNLICENSED SPECTRUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12549956
OPTIMAL NEW RADIO (NR) RESOURCE ALLOCATION USING BANDWIDTH PART (BWP) ACROSS ASYMMETRIC DSS NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543132
COORDINATED ORTHOGONAL FREQUENCY DIVISION MULTIPLE ACCESS (C-OFDMA) IN HIGH DENSITY NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12526033
APPARATUS, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR DETERMINING A SERVING BEAM USING A MEASUREMENT REPORT POOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12507265
SIDELINK RESOURCES BASED ON INTERFERENCE CANCELATION CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
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
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 345 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