Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/550,184

METHOD AND NETWORK NODES FOR HANDLING BUFFER STATUS REPORT (BSR) FORMATS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
CHOWDHURY, HARUN UR R
Art Unit
2473
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
439 granted / 581 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
636
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 581 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Status of Claims 2. Claims 1-10, 19-26, 35 are pending, wherein claims 1, 10, and 19 are in independent form. 3. Claims 1, 4, 10, 19, and 22 have been amended. In view of amendments, rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn. 4. Claims 11-18 and 27-34 have been cancelled. Response to Arguments 5. Applicant's arguments filed on 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below. 6. On page 8 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Thus, Lee fails to disclose the claimed hierarchical dual-bitmap structure for BSR MAC CEs, as its LOP first bitmap merely signals presence of fixed 8-LCG octet groups where second bitmaps already provide per-LCG presence indication, lacking the distinct two- level signaling where first bitmap bits indicate entire second bitmaps and second bitmap bits indicate specific LCG buffer sizes. Furthermore, Lee's rigid grouping and LOP sizing tied to highest LCG ID contrasts with the claims' flexible, data-driven presence without predefined octet boundaries.” In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because: Claim recites a format for a BSR indicating a range of LCG. Lee teaches that each bit of the LOP field indicates a range of LCG (Par 0172-0180). Contrary to applicant’s arguments, claim does not recite any hierarchical dual-bitmap structure for BSR MAC CEs. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 7. 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. 8. Claims 1-10, 19-26, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al (US 20220046464 A1, hereinafter referred to as Lee). Re claim 1, Lee teaches a method performed by a first network node (UE/IAB node) for handling Buffer Status Reports (BSR), BSR, in a communications system (Fig. 7-11), the method comprising: (i) determining a format for a BSR (a new BSR format) indicating a range of Logical Channel Group (LCG) (LOP field indicates a range of LCG) (Fig. 8-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199); (ii) creating the BSR with the determined format (Generating the BSR MAC CE) (Fig. 8-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199); and (iii) providing the created BSR with the determined format (BSR MAC CE ) to a second network node (gNB/IAB node) (Fig. 8-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Claim 10 recites a first network node performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. Claim 26 recites a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions to be executed by a processor to perform the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. Lee further teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions to be executed by a processor (Fig. 2, Par 0084-0089, Par 0198-0199). Re claims 2, 20, Lee teaches that the determined format indicates that the BSR comprises at least one of the following: a total LCG buffer size being a total sum of all LCGs indicated by the LCG range; an individual LCG buffer size of each LCG in the LCG range and identified with a LCG identity ID); a length of a total buffer size field; a sum of the buffer size of all LCGs not indicated by any of the LCG range in the BSR; a bitmap for each of the LCGs covered in the LCG range, wherein the bitmap indicates, for each of the LCGs, if the buffer size is included or not; a last segment flag; a segment number; or a LCG ID (LCG ID included in the BSR MAC CE) (Fig. 8-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Re claims 3, 21, Lee teaches that the LCG range is indicated by one or two parameters (LOP field indicates the LCG range) (Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Re claims 4, 22, Lee teaches that the LCG range is indicated by at least one of: Start LCG ID and End LCG ID; Start LCG ID; LCG set index; or start LCG parameter and substantially all the LCGs between the start LCG parameter and a next indicated start LCG parameter minus 1 (octet in LOP field indicates associated LCG range) (Fig. 9-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Re claim 5, Lee teaches that the format is determined by selecting one format from a plurality of candidate formats (current BSR format, new BSR format) (Par 0160-0168). Re claim 6, Lee teaches that the selected format (New BSR format) from the plurality of candidate formats is the format which is determined to be the most efficient format by the first network node by minimizing an overhead of the format (New BSR format reduces overhead) (Par 0160-0168). Re claim 7, Lee teaches that the format is selected based on a criterion (reducing overhead) (Par 0160-0168). Re claims 8, 24, Lee teaches that the first network node is an Integrated Access Backhaul (IAB) node, a Mobile Termination (MT) part of the IAB node, or a child node (UE/IAB node) (Fig. 7-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Re claims 9, 25, Lee teaches that the second network node (605) is an Integrated Access Backhaul (IAB) donor node, a Distributed Unit (DU) associated with or comprised in an JAB donor node, or a parent node (IAB node communicating in uplink with IAB donor/parent node, Fig. 7) (Fig. 7-11, Par 0153-0155, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Re claim 19, Lee teaches a method performed by a second network node (gNB/IAB node) for handling Buffer Status Reports (BSR) in a communications system (Fig. 7-11), the method comprising: (i) obtaining a BSR (BSR MAC CE), from a first network node (UE/IAB node), with a determined format (new BSR format) indicating a range of Logical Channel Group (LCG) (LOP field indicates a range of LCG) (Fig. 8-11, Par 0164-0168, Par 0172-0180, Par 0183-0186, Par 0192-0195, Par 0199). Claim 35 recites a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions to be executed by a processor to perform the steps recited in claim 19 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 19 (Fig. 2, Par 0084-0089, Par 0198-0199). Re claim 23, Lee teaches to utilize the obtained BSR as an input when deciding what grant to assign to the first network node (allocating UL grant based on the received BSR) (Par 0180-0181, Par 090-091). 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 HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM. 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, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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. /HARUN CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 26, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598570
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE FOR CORRECTING OFFSET BETWEEN BASE STATION AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587900
ERROR HANDLING IN DUAL ACTIVE LINK HANDOVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581531
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR LISTEN-BEFORE-TALK IN A FREQUENCY BAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12556316
CONFIGURABLE MINI-SLOT RETRANSMISSIONS IN SIDELINK COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549428
DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND RELATED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+26.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 581 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