Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/609,492

RANDOM ACCESS CHANNEL OCCASIONS CONFIGURED ON SUB-BAND FULL DUPLEX SYMBOLS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 19, 2024
Examiner
LY, ANH VU H
Art Unit
2472
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
933 granted / 1047 resolved
+31.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1076
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
§103
35.1%
-4.9% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1047 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 INTERPRETATION The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Claim Objections Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, replace “a subscription type” with --a type of a subscription--. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-3, 6, 12, 14-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Choi et al (US 2025/0261246 A1). Regarding claims 1, 14, and 18, Choi discloses an apparatus for wireless communication (Fig. 18, UE), comprising: one or more memories (418th paragraph, UE may include a memory); and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (418th paragraph and Fig. 18, UE may include a processor 1805), the one or more processors individually or collectively configured to: receive a sub-band full duplex (SBFD) time configuration that configures one or more SBFD symbols on one or more downlink or flexible symbols (59th paragraph and Fig. 12b, SBFD configuration 1 for the UE includes a number of symbols for each SBFD slot such as D slot or S slot among D slots and S slots. Herein, each D slot or S slot includes 14 symbols); receive an SBFD frequency configuration that configures one or more downlink sub-bands in the one or more SBFD symbols (Fig. 12b, SBFD configuration 1 includes other DL sub-bands besides UL sub-band in each D slot having a number of SBFD symbols, e.g., 14 symbols) and one or more uplink sub-bands in the one or more SBFD symbols (Fig. 12b, SBFD configuration 1 includes a UL subband in each D slot having a number of SBFD symbols, e.g., 14 symbols); receive a random access channel (RACH) configuration that configures one or more RACH occasions (ROs) in the one or more SBFD symbols (Fig. 13, RO is configured for each UL sub-band in each D slot having 14 SBFD symbols); and transmit, on an uplink sub-band of the one or more uplink sub-bands, a RACH message (Figs. 11 and Fig. 13, UE transmits a preamble to gNB on UL sub-band 1310) on a valid RO of the one or more ROs (287th paragraph, UE may determine the RACH occasion is valid based on RACH occasion does not precede an SS/PBCH and starts after N gap symbols from last reception symbol of SS/PBCH), the valid RO being associated with a subset of a set of SBFD-aware user equipments (UEs) (Fig. 13, RACH occasion is valid for a number SBFD-capable UEs) or one or more RACH triggering events (284th – 288th and 296th – 305th paragraphs, RACH occasion is valid according to first PRACH configuration, according to no TDD DL/UL configuration information received, according to RACH does not precede an SS/PBCH and starts after N gap symbols from last reception symbol of SS/PBCH, etc…). Regarding claims 2, 15, and 19, Choi discloses that wherein the valid RO is associated with the subset of the set of SBFD-aware UEs (Fig. 13, RACH occasion is valid for a number SBFD-capable UEs). Regarding claim 3, Choi discloses that wherein the subset of the set of SBFD-aware UEs is associated with a type of a subscription (254th paragraph, gNB may determine a type of a UE based on random access resource used by the UE. SBFD capble UE may transmit a PRACH through a separate random access resource for the SBFD capable UE). Regarding claims 6, 16, and 20, Choi discloses that wherein the valid RO is associated with the one or more RACH triggering events (284th – 288th and 296th – 305th paragraphs, RACH occasion is valid according to first PRACH configuration, according to no TDD DL/UL configuration information received, according to RACH does not precede an SS/PBCH and starts after N gap symbols from last reception symbol of SS/PBCH, etc…). Regarding claim 12, Choi discloses that wherein RACH configuration is one of a plurality of RACH configurations that correspond to respective subsets of the set of SBFD aware UEs or RACH triggering events (284th and 292nd paragraphs, first PRACH configuration and second PRACH configuration for SBFD capable UEs or triggering conditions). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-5, 7-11, 13, and 17 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 Choi et al (US 2025/0301505 A1), same field of endeavor, discloses SBFD resource configuration for SBFD UEs (Figs. 13-18). Gou et al (US 2024/0407010 A1), same field of endeavor, SBFD RACH access (Figs. 4-8). Grant et al (US 2026/0046103 A1), same field of endeavor, discloses PRACH for SBFD UEs (Figs. 21-30). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH VU H LY whose telephone number is (571)272-3175. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Nick Jensen can be reached at 571-270-5443. 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. ANH VU H. LY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2472 /ANH VU H LY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 19, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604292
RELAY COMMUNICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598032
ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR TRANSMITTING VOICE DATA, AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598498
Measuring a Reference Signal with Associated Synchronization Signal
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588048
COLLISION HANDLING FOR MULTIPLE TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581537
CHANNEL OCCUPANCY TIME DETERMINATION METHOD, FIRST COMMUNICATION NODE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
88%
With Interview (-0.8%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1047 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