Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/568,721

CONFIRMATION TO IMPLICIT BEAM SWITCH

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Priority
Aug 06, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2021111241
Examiner
KIM, WON TAE C
Art Unit
2414
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
243 granted / 275 resolved
+30.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -3% lift
Without
With
+-3.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
297
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
78.4%
+38.4% vs TC avg
§102
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 275 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claims 1-4, 9-12, and 17-28 are pending. Election/Restrictions Claims 5-8, 13-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/17/26. Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I, claims 1-4, 9-12, 17-20, in the reply filed on 4/17/26 is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement The IDS statements filed to date have been considered by the examiner. 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, 9-12, 17-20, 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shin et al., US 2022/0232636, (“Shin”). Independent Claims Regarding claim 1, Shin teaches “An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 16, UE; Fig. 19, UE 100), comprising: a memory (Fig. 19); and at least one processor (Fig. 19) coupled to the memory and configured to: transmit, to a base station, a channel state information (CSI) report associated with a beam switch (paragraph no. 0352, “In this case, the UE may generate a beam/CSI report based on SSB/CSI-RS and transmit the generated beam/CSI report to the base station through PUSCH/PUCCH (S718). The beam/CSI report may include a beam measurement result, information about a preferred beam, and the like”); and perform the beam switch based on the CSI report and an absence, for a period of time after transmission of the CSI report, of a downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indication” (paragraph no. 0352, “The base station and the UE may switch beams based on the beam/CSI report (S720 a, S720 b)”; see Fig. 16, step S720b which shows that a DCI including a TCI indication is not received by the UE during the time interval between transmitting the CSI report and beam switching in step S720b; since Shin does not disclose receiving the DCI, Shin meets/teaches the negative limitation “an absence, for a period of time after transmission of the CSI report, of a downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indication”). Regarding independent claim 17, this independent claim is a corresponding method claim of the apparatus claim 1 and recites similar subject matter. As such, the rationale behind the above rejection of claim 1 applies with equal force to this independent claim. Regarding independent claim 9, Shin teaches “An apparatus for wireless communication at a base station (Fig. 16, BS; Fig. 19, BS 200), comprising: a memory (Fig. 19); and at least one processor (Fig. 19) coupled to the memory and configured to: receive, from a UE, a channel state information (CSI) report associated with a beam switch (paragraph no. 0352, “In this case, the UE may generate a beam/CSI report based on SSB/CSI-RS and transmit the generated beam/CSI report to the base station through PUSCH/PUCCH (S718). The beam/CSI report may include a beam measurement result, information about a preferred beam, and the like”); and perform the beam switch based on the CSI report without transmitting, for a period of time after transmission of the CSI report, a downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indication” (paragraph no. 0352, “The base station and the UE may switch beams based on the beam/CSI report (S720 a, S720 b)”; see Fig. 16, step S720b which shows that a DCI including a TCI indication is not received by the UE during the time interval between transmitting the CSI report and beam switching in step S720b; since Shin does not disclose receiving the DCI, Shin meets/teaches the negative limitation “an absence, for a period of time after transmission of the CSI report, of a downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indication”). Regarding independent claim 21, this independent claim is a corresponding method claim of the apparatus claim 9 and recites similar subject matter. As such, the rationale behind the above rejection of claim 9 applies with equal force to this independent claim. Dependent Claims Regarding claims 2, 10, 18, and 22, Shin teaches “wherein the CSI report indicates a reference signal (RS) associated with the beam switch, and wherein the UE performs the beam switch based on the absence of the DCI including the TCI indication for a set of channels or a set of reference signals (RSs) comprising the RS” (paragraph no. 0352; see Fig. 16, step S720b which shows the “the absence of the DCI including the TCI indication for a set of channels or a set of reference signals (RSs) comprising the RS” since Shin is silent regarding the reception by the UE of such a DCI). Regarding claims 3, 11, 19, and 23, Shin teaches “wherein the CSI report indicates a reference signal (RS) associated with the beam switch, and wherein the UE performs the beam switch based on the absence of the DCI including the TCI indication for a set of channels or a set of reference signals (RSs) applicable to a TCI state associated with the RS associated with the CSI report” (paragraph no. 0352; see Fig. 16, step S720b which shows the “the absence of the DCI including the TCI indication for a set of channels or a set of reference signals (RSs) applicable to a TCI state associated with the RS associated with the CSI report” since Shin is silent regarding the reception by the UE of such a DCI). Regarding claims 4, 12, 20, and 24, Shin teaches “wherein the UE performs the beam switch based on the absence of the DCI that indicates a rejection of the beam switch” (paragraph no. 0352; see Fig. 16, step S720b which shows the “the absence of the DCI that indicates a rejection of the beam switch” since Shin is silent regarding the reception by the UE of such a DCI). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 25, 26, 27, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin in view of Nilsson et al., US 2019/0014568, (“Nilsson”). Regarding claims 25-28, Shin does not teach but Nilsson teaches “wherein the period of time comprises a threshold number of slots or milliseconds starting from an end of the CSI report” (Nilsson: see paragraph nos. 0030, 0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Shin by incorporating the teachings of Nilsson to also account for potential processing time of the CSI report at the base station, as suggested by Nilsson in paragraph no. 0030. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See paragraph no. 0098 of Yuan et al., US 2024/0243798, (“Yuan”), which is relevant to the dependent claims 25-28. In addition, it appears that Yuan also anticipates at least each of the independent claims in view of Fig. 5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WON TAE C. KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1812. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Edan Orgad can be reached at (571)272-7884. 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. /WON TAE C KIM/Primary Examiner, Esq., Art Unit 2414
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
May 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12641628
METHODS FOR SIDELINK COMMUNICATION, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIA
3y 0m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12634890
TIMING ASPECTS FOR NR SL ASSISTANCE INFORMATION MESSAGES
3y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634891
SIDELINK MODE 2 RESOURCE SELECTION FOR INTRA-BAND COEXISTENCE BETWEEN NR V2X AND LTE V2X
3y 3m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634965
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PERFORMING SL COMMUNICATION ON BASIS OF AGGREGATED RESOURCES IN NR V2X
2y 10m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634940
TECHNIQUES FOR TRANSMISSION POWER CONTROL WITH RECONFIGURABLE INTELLIGENT SURFACES
2y 11m to grant Granted May 19, 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
88%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (-3.1%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 275 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