Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/681,820

UPLINK AND DOWNLINK ASYMMETRIC CHANNEL MODEL PARAMETER GENERATING METHOD

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Feb 06, 2024
Examiner
BOKHARI, SYED M
Art Unit
2473
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Southeast University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
694 granted / 841 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
872
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
72.8%
+32.8% vs TC avg
§102
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
§112
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 841 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, anycorrection of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground ofrejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would bethe same under either status. 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. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claim 1 recites "a method of generating parameters for an uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model, comprising following steps: Step 1, determining, a primary antenna configuration of the uplink and downlink, which includes a number of elements, array forms and sub-array arrangements in antenna arrays, then calculating, by utilizing a formula, a three-dimensional pattern of…….” Analysis Under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019 PEG), the claims are analyzed for eligibility in accordance with their broadest reasonable interpretation. Step one: Are the claims at issue directed to process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Claim 1 recites " a method of generating parameters for an uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model, comprising following steps: Step 1, determining, a primary antenna configuration of the uplink and downlink, which includes a number of elements, array forms and sub-array arrangements in antenna arrays, then calculating, by utilizing a formula, a three-dimensional pattern of…….” ( Step 1: YES). Step 2A (Prong 1): Judicial Exception recited? The claim is then analyzed to determine if the claim is directed to a judicial exception. The claim 1 recites "a method of generating parameters for an uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model, comprising following steps: Step 1, determining, a primary antenna configuration of the uplink and downlink, which includes a number of elements, array forms and sub-array arrangements in antenna arrays, then calculating, by utilizing a formula, a three-dimensional pattern of …” The claim recites a mathematical formula and calculation for generating parameters of asymmetric channel model (Step 2A (Prong 1): Yes). Step 2A (Prong 2): Integrated into a practical application? The claim 1 recites "a method of generating parameters for an uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model, comprising following steps: Step 1, determining, a primary antenna configuration of the uplink and downlink, which includes a number of elements, array forms and sub-array arrangements in antenna arrays, then calculating, by utilizing a formula, a three-dimensional pattern of …” Each of the additional limitations is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the asymmetric channel mode. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application performed by a machine because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea (Step 2A (Prong 2): No). Step 2B: Does the claim provides an inventive concept? As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the asymmetric channel model. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on the asymmetric channel model cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. For these reasons, there is no inventive concept in the claim, and thus it is ineligible (Step 2B: No). Claim 2 recites "the method of generating parameters for the uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model according to claim 1, wherein Step 1 specifically includes following steps: obtaining a total number of antennas at the primary side of the uplink and downlink; wherein all antennas are composed of sub-array arrangements, a total number of sub-arrays at a transmitting side is…….” Analysis Under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019 PEG), the claims are analyzed for eligibility in accordance with their broadest reasonable interpretation. Step one: Are the claims at issue directed to process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Claim 2 recites " the method of generating parameters for the uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model according to claim 1, wherein Step 1 specifically includes following steps: obtaining a total number of antennas at the primary side of the uplink and downlink; wherein all antennas are composed of sub-array arrangements, a total number of sub-arrays at a transmitting side is…….” ( Step 1: YES). Step 2A (Prong 1): Judicial Exception recited? The claim is then analyzed to determine if the claim is directed to a judicial exception. The claim 1 recites " the method of generating parameters for the uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model according to claim 1, wherein Step 1 specifically includes following steps: obtaining a total number of antennas at the primary side of the uplink and downlink; wherein all antennas are composed of sub-array arrangements, a total number of sub-arrays at a transmitting side is…….” The claim recites a mathematical formula and calculation for generating parameters of asymmetric channel model (Step 2A (Prong 1): Yes). Step 2A (Prong 2): Integrated into a practical application? The claim 1 recites "the method of generating parameters for the uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model according to claim 1, wherein Step 1 specifically includes following steps: obtaining a total number of antennas at the primary side of the uplink and downlink; wherein all antennas are composed of sub-array arrangements, a total number of sub-arrays at a transmitting side is…….” Each of the additional limitations is no more than mere instructions and formula to apply the exception using the asymmetric channel mode. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application performed by a machine because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea (Step 2A (Prong 2): No). Step 2B: Does the claim provides an inventive concept? As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the asymmetric channel model. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on the asymmetric channel model cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. For these reasons, there is no inventive concept in the claim, and thus it is ineligible (Step 2B: No). Claims 3-6 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as applied above. 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. Claim 6 is also 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. A portion of the feature of the claim 6 recites “Disclosed in the present disclosure is an uplink and downlink asymmetric channel model parameter generating method. According to a modeling method, uplink and downlink channel transmission matrices can be generated at the same time when an asymmetric transceiving antenna configuration is used in an uplink and a downlink. In the method, firstly, parameters of a propagation channel between antennas are generated by using a geometric stochastic modeling method according to environmental parameters. Then an antenna pattern is introduced to calculate effective scatterers and corresponding effective paths of the uplink and the downlink. Finally, channel impulse responses of the uplink and the downlink are obtained. The method can be applied to the simulation and optimization of actual asymmetric communication systems”. The quoted feature does not have any relation with the claimed formulas for calculating the channel impulse responses of the downlink and uplinks asymmetric channels. Examiner Comments The claims 1-6 will be allowable, if the 35USC 101 and 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections are overcome. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tsui et al. (US 20220278730 A1) and Reed (US 20170019154 A1). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED M BOKHARI whose telephone number is (571)270-3115. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday. 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, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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. /SYED M BOKHARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2473 2/18/2026 /KWANG B YAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604260
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMIC SLICE SELECTION IN A WIRELESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12574823
RADIO LINK CONTROL (RLC) RECONFIGURATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557002
Assigning User Plane Functions (UPFs) within a 5G core network
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12557074
WIRELESS LINK CONFIGURATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549648
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD USING MULTIPLE LINKS, AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TERMINAL USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 841 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