Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/683,594

UPLINK REPETITION TRANSMISSIONS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 14, 2024
Examiner
SANTARISI, ABDUL AZIZ
Art Unit
2465
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
50%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allow Rate
7 granted / 14 resolved
-8.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
59.5%
+19.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 14 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/14/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-12, 15, 17-21, 24 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Lin et al (US 20230224874 A1) hereinafter Lin. Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising: receiving a repetition configuration associated with transmitting a plurality of repetitions of an uplink transmission (receiving configuration parameters for uplink repetition schemes [0086]-[0093] and [0149]), the repetition configuration including at least one of: offset information indicating an offset between a first repetition of the plurality of repetitions and a second repetition of the plurality of repetitions (including the offset between each two neighboring repetitions [0093]; Figs. 1-3), starting symbol information indicating a starting symbol of the first repetition and a starting symbol of the second repetition (TDRA list containing a starting symbol S for the transmission occasions [0091] and [0149]), or size information indicating a size of the first repetition and a size of the second repetition (TDRA list containing an allocation length L for the repetitions [0091] and [0149]); and transmitting at least one repetition of the uplink transmission based at least in part on the repetition configuration (transmitting PUSCH based on the received configuration [0148]-[0153]; Fig. 15). Regarding claim 2, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the offset information indicates a fixed offset associated with the plurality of repetitions (offset values can be a fixed value depending on the repetition scheme [0101]-[0102]). Regarding claim 3, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the offset information indicates a sequence of offsets, each offset in the sequence of offsets being associated with a different pair of repetitions from the plurality of repetitions (offset values can be a fixed or varying value depending on the repetition scheme [0101]-[0102]). Regarding claim 4, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the offset between the first repetition and the second repetition is indicated in terms of symbols, sub-slots, or slots (offset in terms of symbols [0101]-[0102]). Regarding claim 6, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the starting symbol of the first repetition or the starting symbol of the second repetition is indicated in terms of a symbol, a sub-slot, or a slot (TDRA list containing a starting symbol S for the transmission occasions [0091] and [0149]). Regarding claim 8, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the uplink transmission is a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) transmission or a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission (transmitting PUSCH based on the received configuration [0148]-[0153]; Fig. 15). Regarding claim 9, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches the repetition configuration is received via radio resource control (RRC) signaling, in a medium access control (MAC) control element, or in downlink control information (DCI) (the offset value(s) may be configured through RRC, MSCE-CE, or DCI [0102]). Claim [10 and 12] “BS method”, claims [19 and 21] “UE” and Claim [26 and 27] “BS” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1 and 3] “UE method”. Claim [11 and 15] “BS method” and claims [20 and 24] “UE” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [2 and 6] “UE method”. Claim [17] “BS method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim [8] “UE method”. Claim [18] “BS method” and claim [29] “BS” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim [9] “UE method”. 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness. Claims 5, 7, 14, 16, 23, 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Ying et al. (US 20220103294 A1) hereinafter Ying. Regarding claim 5, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin further teaches wherein a given starting symbol in the sequence of starting symbols is relative to a beginning of a slot containing a corresponding repetition of the plurality of repetitions (TDRA containing a starting symbol S with respect to the start of the slot [0091]). Lin does not explicitly teach the starting symbol information indicates a sequence of starting symbols, each starting symbol in the sequence of starting symbols being associated with a different repetition of the plurality of repetitions. Ying teaches the starting symbol information indicates a sequence of starting symbols, each starting symbol in the sequence of starting symbols being associated with a different repetition of the plurality of repetitions (the time domain resource allocation indicating each starting symbol of the mini-slot based repetitions [0064]-[0072]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Ying to the teachings of Lin. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance resource allocation flexibility (Ying [0003]-[0004]). Regarding claim 7, Lin teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Lin does not explicitly teach the size information indicates a sequence of sizes, each size in the sequence of sizes being associated with a different repetition from the plurality of repetitions. Ying teaches the size information indicates a sequence of sizes, each size in the sequence of sizes being associated with a different repetition from the plurality of repetitions (the time domain resource allocation indicating each length of the mini-slot based repetitions [0064]-[0072]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Ying to the teachings of Lin. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance resource allocation flexibility (Ying [0003]-[0004]). Claim [14] “BS method”, claim [23] “UE” and Claim [28] “BS” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim [5] “UE method”. Claim [16] “BS method” and claim [30] “BS” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim [7] “UE method”. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM ET. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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. /ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 14, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12538274
EXCESS SLOT-TIME RE-FARMING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12526710
MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND Non-PSC CONNECTION METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12520257
USER EQUIPMENT SYNCHRONIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12470972
TRANSMISSION METHOD AND NODE DEVICE IMPLEMENTING SAID METHOD WITH LIMITED MAXIMUM USE TIME ON A SLIDING TIME WINDOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12470947
COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD USING LARGE INTELLIGENT SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
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
50%
Grant Probability
50%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 14 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