Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/557,638

CHANNEL OCCUPANCY TIME (COT) INITIATION FOR CROSS-FIXED FRAME PERIOD (FFP) SCHEDULING OF UPLINK COMMUNICATIONS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 27, 2023
Priority
Jul 01, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2021104053
Examiner
SHAHEED, KHALID W
Art Unit
2643
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
714 granted / 860 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
902
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.2%
+13.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 860 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.Applicant's submission filed on 11/25/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments 3. Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-30 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 4. 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. 4. Claim(s) 1, 13, 16, 28, 10, 15, 25 & 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #104b-e 2103326, et al (FROM IDS) in view of Singh et al. (US 2023/0189338 A1) Regarding claim 1 & 13, 3GPP discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), method of wireless communication performed by a base station, the methods comprising: Receiving/transmitting, from a base station (BS) in a first fixed frame period (FFP) (see FFP period for UE to receive from gNB, page 1), downlink communication information (DCI) (see DCI page 3), wherein the DCI indicates a scheduled uplink (UL) (see UE-initated COT, and scheduled UL transmission, page 3) communication in a second FFP subsequent to the first FFP (next gNBs FFP period, page 3) ; monitoring for a downlink (DL) signal in the second FFP (see detection, page 6) ; and transmitting/receiving, to the BS based on the monitoring and a first parameter (see page 8, "cg-RetransmissionTimer is not configured, a symbol overlapping with idle period of a FFP associated to PUSCH transmission") indicating whether the scheduled UL communication is associated with a BS channel occupancy time (COT) or a UE COT, the scheduled UL communication (see "When UE detects a DL burst from gNB, it needs to determine whether the DL burst is transmitted according to a gNB COT or a shared UE COT. The following behaviour can be considered. 1) If UE determines that the DL burst belongs to a gNB COT, it can share the gNB COT and perform UL transmission in the remaining gNB COT duration." page 3, bottom) ; 3GPP does not specifically disclose however Singh discloses receiving, from the BS, a second parameter indicating whether the UE is enabled to initiate a UE initiated channel occupancy time (COT) (see [0059] UE initiated COT) for the scheduled UL communication ([0059] may include uplink data) in the second FFP (see [0027] wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs); 3GPP does not however specifically Singh discloses UE initiated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”)’; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. Regarding claims 16 & 28; 3GPP discloses a user equipment (UE) and base station, comprising: a transceiver (discloses a UE and gnB with transmission and recepton capabilities thus a transceiver would be present page 4) ; and a processor in communication with the transceiver and configured to (discloses a UE and gnB with and processor would be absolutely expected page 4) : cause the transceiver to receive, from a base station (BS) in a first fixed frame period (FFP) (see GNB FFP, page 4) downlink communication information (DCI) (see "DCI" page 4), wherein the DCI indicates a scheduled uplink (UL) communication in a second FFP subsequent to the first FFP (see next gNB's FFP, page 3) ; monitor (see detects page 3) for a downlink (DL) (see "detects a DL", page 3) signal in the second FFP; and cause the transceiver to transmit, to the BS based on the monitoring and a first parameter (see cg-RetransmissionTimer is not configured, a symbol overlapping with idle period of a FFP associated to PUSCH transmission, page 8) indicating whether the scheduled UL communication is associated with a BS channel occupancy time (COT) or a UE COT, the scheduled UL communication (see "When UE detects a DL burst from gNB, it needs to determine whether the DL burst is transmitted according to a gNB COT or a shared UE COT. The following behaviour can be considered. 1) If UE determines that the DL burst belongs to a gNB COT, it can share the gNB COT and perform UL transmission in the remaining gNB COT duration. "; page 3, bottom) ; 3GPP does not specifically disclose however Signh discloses receiving, from the BS, a second parameter indicating whether the UE is enabled to initiate a UE channel occupancy time (COT) (see [0027], UE initiated COT) for the scheduled UL communication in the second FFP ([0059] may include uplink data, see additional FFPs in [0027] which is part of subject for invention) ; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. Regarding claims 10, 15, 25 & 30, 3GPP discloses wherein the first parameter comprises a rule for determining whether to transmit the scheduled UL communication in the BS COT or the UE COT (see rules, bottom of page 4); 3GPP does not however specifically Singh discloses UE initiated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. 6. Claim(s) 2, 9, 14, 16 & 29, 3 & 18, 4 & 19, 6-7, 21-22 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Singh et al. in further view of Salah (US 2022/0225386 A1). Regarding claims 2, 14, 16 & 29, 3GPP does not however specifically Singh discloses UE initiated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. 3GPP and Singh does not specifically disclose however Salah discloses wherein: the DCI includes the first parameter, and the first parameter indicates at least one of: the UE to share the BS COT in the second FFP; or the UE to initiate the UE COT in the second FFP (see [0022], "signal FFP parameters of the UE COT that it is sharing its COT to other UEs to determine when network node 125 is supposed to end the sharing. Under the proposed scheme, UE 110 may determine implicitly that network node 125 is sharing another UE COT in an event that network node 125 is transmitting in its own FFP idle periods. ") ; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP and Singh with that of Salah. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions within the field of invention. Regarding claims 3 & 18, 3GPP does not however Salah discloses wherein: the first parameter indicates the UE to share the BS COT, and the transmitting the scheduled UL communication comprises: transmitting, in response to detecting the DL signal in the second FFP, the scheduled UL communication in the BS COT (see page 9, "Proposal 10: Clarify that for scheduled UL, the FFP/channel where a UL (each UL repetition in case of repetition) is scheduled can be same or different from the FFP/channel where an associated UL grant is transmitted.") Regarding claims 4 & 19, 3GPP does not however specifcially Signh discvloses UE iniated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. 3GPP does not however Salah discloses wherein: the first parameter indicates the UE to share the BS coT, and the transmitting the scheduled UL communication comprises: transmitting, in response to failing to detect the DL signal in the second FFP, the scheduled UL communication in the UE COT (see pages 8- 9, "Proposal 6: For a scheduled UL transmission, the COT initiator determination is based on the content in the scheduling DCI. If the content is absent, the determination is based on the rules applied for configured UL transmissions."); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP and Singh with that of Salah. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions within the field of invention. Regarding claims 6 & 21, 3GPP does not however Salah discloses wherein: the first parameter indicates the UE to initiate the UE COT, and the transmitting the scheduled UL communication comprises: transmitting the scheduled UL communication in the UE COT (see scheduled UL transmission, page 8, bottom) Regarding claims 7 & 22, 3GPP does not however specifically Signh discloses UE initiated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. 3GPP does not however Salah discloses wherein: the first parameter indicates the UE to initiate the UE coT, and the transmitting the scheduled UL communication comprises: transmitting, in response to detecting the DL signal, the scheduled UL communication in the BS COT (see page 9, "A responding device can still transmit in the shared COT even if its transmission collides with the idle period of FFP configured for the responding device. "); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP and Singh with that of Salah. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions within the field of invention. Regarding claims 9 & 24, 3GPP does not however specifically Signh discloses UE initiated (see [0027], “wireless device initiated COT in a next FFP of the first plurality of FFPs”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP in view of Singh. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions in the art. 3GPP does not however Salah discloses wherein, wherein: the first parameter indicates the UE to initiate the UE COT, and the transmitting the scheduled UL communication comprises: transmitting, in response to failing to detect the DL signal, the scheduled UL communication in the UE COT (scheduled UL, page 9); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of 3GPP and Singh with that of Salah. Doing so would conform to well-known conventions within the field of invention. Allowable Subject Matter 7. Claims 5, 8, 11-12, 20, 23, 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K. WILFORD SHAHEED whose telephone number is (469)295-9175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am-5pm; CST; ALT Friday. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. The examiner’s Supervisor Jinsong Hu can be reached at (571)272-3965 where attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KHALID W SHAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 4 earlier events
Jan 21, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 04, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 07, 2026
Interview Requested
May 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12707413
TERMINAL OPERATION METHOD AND DEVICE IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12707520
MASTER NODE, COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD, AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12707380
SLICE ADMISSION CONTROL METHOD AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12696161
COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD
4y 10m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12696098
Mining Mobile Communication System and Method
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 860 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