Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/609,283

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-ENABLED AUTOMATIC REPEAT REQUEST

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 19, 2024
Examiner
WASHINGTON, ERIKA ALISE
Art Unit
2644
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
889 granted / 1000 resolved
+26.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
1016
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
§103
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§102
40.3%
+0.3% vs TC avg
§112
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1000 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 . 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. (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, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Applicant’s submission of prior art, Lee et al., W0 2020/159261 (hereinafter Lee). Regarding claims 1, 19, and 20, Lee discloses a wireless device, comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the wireless device to: receive control signaling that indicates a configuration comprising a first set of one or more parameters for an automatic repeat request procedure associated with a radio link control entity of the wireless device [fig. 12: steps S1200, S1204; paragraphs 0246, 0254], wherein at least one parameter of the first set of one or more parameters is associated with a plurality of values [wherein each of the uplink grants relate to a number of retransmission]; select a value of the plurality of values for the automatic repeat request procedure based at least in part on a second set of one or more parameters [fig. 12: step S1210; paragraph 0258]; receive at least one negative acknowledgment for at least one protocol data unit of a set of one or more protocol data units associated with the radio link control entity of the wireless device [fig. 12: step S1214; paragraph 0262]; and perform one or more operations based at least in part on the at least one negative acknowledgment and the selected value of the plurality of values for the automatic repeat request procedure, wherein the one or more operations includes a drop of the at least one protocol data unit, a retransmission of the at least one protocol data unit, or a declaration of a radio link failure [paragraph 0262; fig. 12: step S1220; paragraph 0268]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Applicant’s submission of prior art, Kanamarlapudi et al., WO 2014/025755 (hereinafter Kanamarlapudi). Regarding claim2, Lee does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the wireless device to: transmit, via the radio link control entity of the wireless device, an indication to a second radio link control entity of a second wireless device for updating a reception window associated with the set of one or more protocol data units, wherein the one or more operations are performed further based at least in part on the indication. However, Kanamarlapudi teaches this limitation [fig. 7; paragraphs 0076-0086]. Before the effective filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee to include the teaching of Kanamarlapudi. The motivation for this modification would have been combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 3, Kanamarlapudi teaches wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the wireless device to: generate a control protocol data unit comprising a set of one or more fields, wherein at least one field of the set of one or more fields comprises the indication, wherein updating the reception window corresponds to moving the reception window according to at least one sequence number; transmit, to the second wireless device, the control protocol data unit; and update a sequence number associated with at least one second protocol data unit based at least in part on the indication, wherein the sequence number corresponds to the at least one sequence number [fig. 7; paragraphs 0076-0086]. Regarding claim 4, Kanamarlapudi teaches wherein the indication serves as a trigger to update a third set of one or more parameters associated with the second radio link control entity of the second wireless device, and wherein the third set of one or more parameters comprises a sequence number parameter associated with the set of one or more protocol data units, a reassembly parameter associated with the set of one or more protocol data units, or a status parameter associated with the set of one or more protocol data units [fig. 7; paragraphs 0076-0086]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-18 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. Li et al, US Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0323711, disclose good cell quality criteria. Wang et al., US Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0088550, disclose conditionally handling hybrid automatic repeat request process in configuration grant activation procedure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIKA WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-7841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday. 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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-270-5371. 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. /EAW/ February 17, 2026 /ERIKA A WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 19, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598231
Mobile Offloading for Disconnected Terminal Operation
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597334
ALARM SYSTEM DETECTOR GEOFENCING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587813
SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR ASSET TRACKING, ASSET GROUPING, AND ERROR RECOVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574188
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DISABLING HYBRID AUTOMATIC REPEAT REQUEST IN INTERNET OF THINGS-NON-TERRESTRIAL NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574998
Multi-Consecutive Slots Transmission with Sidelink Discontinuous Reception
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+4.3%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1000 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