Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/578,376

TERMINAL DEVICE, NETWORK NODE, AND METHODS THEREIN FOR HANDLING PATH SWITCH AND HANDOVER

Non-Final OA §101§102§103§112
Filed
Jan 11, 2024
Examiner
TORRES, MARCOS L
Art Unit
2647
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
465 granted / 692 resolved
+5.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
744
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 692 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 66 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to a “computer readable storage medium”, since the specification does not specify the scope of the computer readable storage medium, for examination purposes is going to be equated to a transitory signal; thereby, directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 20-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims recite the limitation “when a triggering criterion...”; however, before the condition the claims fail to require to receive or use a triggering criterion. Thereby, it is unclear how the condition can be true if there is no triggering criterion. Please, clarify. The rest of the claims they include the limitation or share the deficiency by virtue of dependency. Claims 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims recite the limitation “without transmitting the measurement report to the first network node.”; it is unclear if the limitation apply only after the notification step [and/or inside the operation step]. Please clarify. 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)(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) 19, 29-31 and 65-66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu 20180343598. As to claim 19, Xu discloses a method in a first terminal device [Remote UE], the first terminal device having a second terminal device [Source relay UE] serving as a relay towards a first network node [eNB1 or eNB2] or being a candidate to serve as a relay towards the first network node or a second network node [A remote UE far away from a base station may communicate with the base station via the relay UE] (see par. 0004), the method comprising: receiving a first indication from the second terminal device, the first indication indicating that the second terminal device is performing a handover procedure [if it needs to trigger the relay reselection process, the source relay UE notifies the remote UE of relay reselection trigger information and scenario information. Subsequently, if the source relay UE is in a first scenario in which a handover is to be performed, the source relay UE determines candidate target cells for the user equipment, and sets a bias value for each of the candidate target cells. Subsequently, the source relay UE transmits a cell ID of the candidate target cell and a corresponding bias value to the remote UE] (see par. 0086, 0102); and performing an operation in response to receiving the first indication [the remote UE performs a relay discovery process or any step after the notification in fig. 5] (see par. 0086). Regarding claims 65-66, they are the corresponding device and computer readable medium claims of method claim 19. Therefore, claims 65-66 are rejected for the same reasons as shown above. As to claim 29, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising: receiving, from the first network node or another control device, an instruction or configuration to perform the operation in response to receiving the first indication (see par. 0086, 0102). As to claim 30, Xu discloses the method of claim 19,wherein:the first indication is received directly from the second terminal device, or is forwarded by a third terminal device, using: Radio Resource Control, RRC, signaling,PC5 Signaling, PC5-S,discovery signaling, Medium Access Control, MAC, Control Element, CE, Layer 1, L1, signaling, or control Protocol Data Unit, PDU, of a protocol layer, or the first indication is forwarded by the first network node using: RRC signaling, MAC CE,L1 signaling, or control PDU of a protocol layer (see fig. 5). As to claim 31, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the first indication is a one-bit indication [handover scenario], a Boolean value, or a field whose presence indicates that the second terminal device is performing the handover procedure (see par. 0056, 0086, 0102). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu 20180343598. As to claims 24, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein said performing the operation comprises, when a triggering criterion is fulfilled: initiating a cell reselection, relay discovery, or relay reselection procedure, or entering a Radio Resource Control, RRC, IDLE or INACTIVE state, without transmitting the measurement report to the first network node [initial report transmitted to the relay device, not first network node] (see fig. 5; par. 0049-0050, 0056, 0086). Xu fails to disclose the intended use of the triggering criterion for a measurement report. However, no actual report is really required or transmitted, and it would be obvious that a triggering criterion can be used for any procedure since it is going to bring the same predictable result of triggering the desired procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply the triggering criterion to the desired procedure including measurement report if desired, since it is going to bring the same predictable result of triggering the desired procedure; thereby, reporting if desired and allowing the initiation of the desired procedure. Claim(s) 20-21, 23 and 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu 20180343598 in view of Chang 20240205993. As to claims 20-21, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein said performing the operation comprises: delaying (TTT) by a predetermined time length, when a triggering criterion for reselecting a cell is fulfilled, and performing the delayed step (see par. 0063, 0150). Xu transmit at the beginning rather than activated by a criterion. In an analogous art, Chang discloses transmitting a measurement report when activated by a triggering criterion [remote UE device 108 transmits a measurement report 120 based on received RRC connection status of the candidate relay UE devices 101-103] (see par. 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to transmit a measurement report to the relay devices for the simple purpose of letting the relays device to help with the reselection process. As to claims 23, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein said performing the operation comprises: transmitting, when a triggering criterion for reselecting a cell is fulfilled, the indication to the first network node, the measurement report containing the first indication indicating that the second terminal device is performing the handover procedure (see par. 0046-0047, 0063, 0086 0150). Xu transmit at the beginning rather than activated by a criterion. In an analogous art, Chang discloses transmitting a measurement report when activated by a triggering criterion [remote UE device 108 transmits a measurement report 120 based on received RRC connection status of the candidate relay UE devices 101-103] (see par. 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to transmit a measurement report to the relay devices for the simple purpose of letting the relays device to help with the reselection process. As to claims 25-26, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein said performing the operation comprises: changing a triggering criterion for reselecting a cell to be more difficult to be fulfilled, wherein the triggering criterion comprises at least one of a threshold, an offset, and a hypothesis (see par. 0053). Xu transmit at the beginning rather than activated by a criterion. In an analogous art, Chang discloses transmitting a measurement report when activated by a triggering criterion [remote UE device 108 transmits a measurement report 120 based on received RRC connection status of the candidate relay UE devices 101-103] (see par. 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to transmit a measurement report to the relay devices for the simple purpose of letting the relays device to help with the reselection process. As to claims 27, Xu discloses the method of claim 20, wherein the measurement report includes one or more of: a first link measurement between the first terminal device and the first network node, a second link measurement between the first terminal device and the second network node, a third link measurement between the first terminal device and the second terminal device (the user equipment may measure and report the first link information periodically or triggered by event.) (see par. 0046, 0059), and a fourth link measurement between the first terminal device and a third terminal device. As to claims 28, Xu discloses the method of claim 19, wherein said performing the operation comprises, when the second terminal device is the candidate to serve as the relay: transmitting, when a triggering criterion for reselect a cell is fulfilled, a measurement report to the first network node, the measurement report including a first link measurement between the first terminal device and the first network node and/or a second link measurement between the first terminal device and the second network node and/or a fourth link measurement between the first terminal device and a third terminal device (see par. 0063, 0150). Xu transmit at the beginning rather than activated by a criterion. In an analogous art, Chang discloses transmitting a measurement report when activated by a triggering criterion [remote UE device 108 transmits a measurement report 120 based on received RRC connection status of the candidate relay UE devices 101-103] (see par. 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to transmit a measurement report to the relay devices for the simple purpose of letting the relays device to help with the reselection process. The previous references fail to explicitly disclose excluding a third link measurement between the first terminal device and the second terminal device. However, it is noted that the link is not required. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to exclude information from links not exist, for the simple purpose that if the link does not exist, then there would be no quality measure. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: wherein said delaying comprises: delaying the transmission of the measurement report until a second indication indicating that the handover procedure is completed is received from the second terminal device or the first network node have not been found nor have been fairly suggested in the prior art search. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F. 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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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. MARCOS L. TORRES Primary Examiner Art Unit 2647 /MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 11, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598454
DYNAMIC CONFIGURATION OF AN ELECTRONIC SUBSCRIBER IDENTIFICATION MODULE IN A VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12563496
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF FOR SETTING TARGET WAKE TIME PARAMETERS BASED ON RESPONSE SIGNAL RECEIVED FROM EXTERNAL ELECTRONIC DEVICE OF DIFFERENT BASIC SERVICE SET
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563491
CHANNEL ACCESS MECHANISM FOR LOW POWER WAKE-UP RECEIVERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12542846
PHONE CASE FOR TRACKING AND LOCALIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12532289
LOCATION CALIBRATION METHOD AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
67%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+11.4%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 692 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