Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/616,934

COMMUNICATION METHOD AND DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
TALUKDER, MD K
Art Unit
2648
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
645 granted / 808 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
841
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
63.7%
+23.7% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 808 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 . 2. It would be of great assistance to the office if all incoming papers pertaining to a filed application carried the following items: i. Application number (checked for accuracy, including series code and serial no.). ii. Group art unit number (copied from most recent Office communication). iii. Filing date. iv. Name of the examiner who prepared the most recent Office action. v. Title of invention. vi. Confirmation number (See MPEP § 503). 3. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. 4. Claim interpretation: When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations doesn’t have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional. Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 103 5. 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 of this title, 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. Claims 1, 2, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behzad (Pub No. 2010/0317300) and further in view of Sugar et al (Pub No. 2003/0203743). Regarding claim 1, Behzad discloses a communication device (Fig. 13: Transceiver device), comprising: a first transceiver circuit (Fig. 13: Transceiver device upper TX/ RX part), a second transceiver circuit and (Fig. 13: Transceiver device’s lower TX/ RX part), at least one processor configured as a switch control unit (Para. 66: a plurality of transmit/receive switches 170-176 & Para. 8: system controller control the RF device), and a first signal processing channel (Para. 41 & Fig. 13: 1st frequency band channel-80 connected to baseband module 18 to baseband processor-178), wherein the first signal processing channel comprises a first analog-to-digital conversion unit (Para. 36 & 39: The processing includes analog-to-digital conversion); a first intermediate frequency (Para. 10: Intermediate frequency stages mix the amplified RF signals with local oscillations to convert the amplified RF signal into baseband signals/ intermediate frequency (IF) signals), and a first baseband processing unit (Fig. 13: baseband processing-178); the switch control unit is configured to determine, based on resource control information, to connect the first transceiver circuit (Fig. 6 & 13) & (Para. 48: Multiplexer-84. 1st and 2nd mode of the mode signals- 32. Mode signal 32 acts as a switch control signal and select a frequency band by multiplexer-84, switch control perform based on the resource control information. System selects either 1st or 2nd frequency for communication); and a first radio frequency band in the first transceiver circuit is different from a second radio frequency band in the second transceiver circuit (Fig. 13 & 3: 1st band-40 & 2nd band-42 & Para. 41: 1st band and 2nd band are different). Behzad does not explicitly discloses first intermediate frequency channel unit. In a similar field of endeavor, Sugar et al discloses first intermediate frequency channel unit (Fig. 2-4: intermediate frequency (IF) conversion architecture with intermediate frequency channel) & (Para. 27 & 35 & 39). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the radio transceiver IF signal processing system of Sugar’s disclosure with the multi band RF signal processing system, as taught by Behzad. Doing so would have resulted in effectively processing radio signals in a MIMO transceiver to generate desire quality signal for the desire band with higher reliability. Regarding claim 8, Claim 8 corresponds to claim 1 and is analyzed accordingly. Regarding claim 14, Claim 14 corresponds to claim 1 and is analyzed accordingly. Regarding claim 2 & 9 & 15, Behzad discloses wherein the resource control information comprises configuration information of resource units of the first radio frequency band and the second radio frequency band (Fig. 13 & 3: 1st band-40 & 2nd band-42 & Para. 41-42: configuration information of resource on 1st and 2nd frequency band). Regarding claim 4 & 11 & 17, Behzad discloses the device further comprises: a third transceiver circuit (Fig. 13: 3rd transceiver-174), the at least one processor is further configured as a second signal processing channel (Fig. 13: multiple signal processing channel), connected to the first signal processing channel (Fig. 13: Signal processing channel are connected), the second signal processing channel comprises a second analog-to-digital conversion unit (Para. 36 & 39: The processing includes analog-to-digital conversion) and the switch control unit is configured to, based on the resource control information, connect one or more of the first transceiver circuit, the second transceiver circuit, and the third transceiver circuit to at least one of the first signal processing channel or the second signal processing channel (Fig. 6 & 13) & (Para. 48: Multiplexer-84. 1st and 2nd mode of the mode signals- 32. Mode signal 32 acts as a switch control signal and select a frequency band by multiplexer-84, switch control perform based on the resource control information. System selects either 1st or 2nd frequency for communication). Behzad does not explicitly discloses a second intermediate frequency channel unit. In a similar field of endeavor, Sugar et al discloses a second intermediate frequency channel unit (Fig. 2-4: intermediate frequency (IF) conversion architecture with intermediate frequency channel) & (Para. 27 & 35). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the radio transceiver IF signal processing system of Sugar’s disclosure with the multi band RF signal processing system, as taught by Behzad. Doing so would have resulted in effectively processing radio signals in a MIMO transceiver to generate desire quality signal for the desire band with higher reliability. Claims 3, 5-7, 10, 12, 13, 16 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behzad (Pub No. 2010/0317300), in view of Sugar et al (Pub No. 2003/0203743) and further in view of Asuri et al (Pub No. 2021/0091819). Regarding claim 3 & 10 & 16, Behzad is silent regarding the first signal processing channel is an uplink signal processing channel, and an uplink timeslot of the first radio frequency band is staggered with an uplink timeslot of the second radio frequency band. Asuri et al discloses the first signal processing channel is an uplink signal processing channel (Para. 80 & 88: Uplink signal processing), and an uplink timeslot of the first radio frequency band is staggered with an uplink timeslot of the second radio frequency band (Para. 10: TDD uplink timeslot of the TDD frame) & (Fig. 4: Frequency allocation for uplink). At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use uplink signal processing properly to minimize signal interference in the uplink communication. Regarding claim 5 & 12 & 18, Behzad discloses at least two radio frequency bands of the first radio frequency band, the second radio frequency band, and a third radio frequency band of the third transceiver circuit are different from each other (Fig. 13 & 3: 1st band-40 & 2nd band-42 & Para. 41: 1st band and 2nd band are different and using multiple different frequency band). Behzad is silent regarding the first signal processing channel and the second signal processing channel are uplink signal processing channels, and uplink timeslots of the at least two radio frequency bands, which are different from each other are staggered. Asuri et al discloses the first signal processing channel and the second signal processing channel are uplink signal processing channels (Fig. 2-3 & Para. 80 & 88), and uplink timeslots of the at least two radio frequency bands, which are different from each other are staggered (Para. 10: TDD uplink timeslot of the TDD frame) & (Fig. 4: Frequency allocation for uplink). At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use uplink signal processing properly to minimize signal interference in the uplink communication. Regarding claim 6 & 13 & 19, Behzad is silent regarding the first signal processing channel is an uplink signal processing channel and an uplink timeslot of the first radio frequency band is staggered with an uplink timeslot of the second radio frequency band. Asuri et al discloses the first signal processing channel is an uplink signal processing channel and an uplink timeslot of the first radio frequency band is staggered with an uplink timeslot of the second radio frequency band (Fig. 2-3 & Para. 80 & 88) & (Para. 10: TDD uplink timeslot of the TDD frame) & (Fig. 4: Frequency allocation for uplink). At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use uplink signal processing properly to minimize signal interference in the uplink communication. Regarding claim 7 & 20, Behzad discloses the device further comprises: a third transceiver circuit (Fig. 13: 3rd transceiver-174), the at least one processor is further configured as a second signal processing channel (Fig. 13: multiple signal processing channel), connected to the first signal processing channel (Fig. 13: Signal processing channel are connected), the second signal processing channel comprises a second analog-to-digital conversion unit (Para. 36 & 39: The processing includes analog-to-digital conversion) and the switch control unit is configured to, based on the resource control information, connect one or more of the first transceiver circuit, the second transceiver circuit, and the third transceiver circuit to at least one of the first signal processing channel or the second signal processing channel (Fig. 6 & 13) & (Para. 48: Multiplexer-84. 1st and 2nd mode of the mode signals- 32. Mode signal 32 acts as a switch control signal and select a frequency band by multiplexer-84, switch control perform based on the resource control information. System selects either 1st or 2nd frequency for communication). Behzad does not explicitly discloses a second intermediate frequency channel unit. In a similar field of endeavor, Sugar et al discloses a second intermediate frequency channel unit (Fig. 2-4: intermediate frequency (IF) conversion architecture with intermediate frequency channel) & (Para. 27 & 35). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the radio transceiver IF signal processing system of Sugar’s disclosure with the multi band RF signal processing system, as taught by Behzad. Doing so would have resulted in effectively processing radio signals in a MIMO transceiver to generate desire quality signal for the desire band with higher reliability. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD K TALUKDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3222. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur from 10 am to 6 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, Wesley Kim can be reached on 571-272-7867. 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. /MD K TALUKDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604637
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601808
Beam Alignment Method and Related Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602920
IMAGE RECOGNITION METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582302
APPARATUS, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IN VIVO IMAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575733
STORAGE MEDIUM, IMAGE MANAGEMENT APPARATUS, READING TERMINAL, AND IMAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
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
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.8%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 808 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