Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/688,468

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING PDCP SDU CONCATENATION OPERATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 01, 2024
Examiner
DOAN, DUYEN MY
Art Unit
2459
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 670 resolved
+23.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 670 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 statement (IDS) submitted on 6/6/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossbach et al (us 2024/0187919) (hereinafter Rossbach) in view of Sagfors et al (us 2007/0019553) (hereinafter Sagfors). As regarding claim 1, Rossbach discloses receiving a first Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) from an upper layer, wherein a concatenation timer is started upon the first PDCP SDU is received based on the concatenation timer not being running (see Rossbach 0107-0108, start a timer upon receiving packet such as SDU, also see Rossbach 0063, concatenation can apply in either downlink or uplink); receiving a second PDCP SDU from the upper layer (see Rossbach 0107-0108, receive additional packets); generating a PDCP protocol data unit (PDU) including the first PDCP SDU and the second PDCP SDU, based on the concatenation timer being running (see Rossbach 0107-0109, concatenation is activated or deactivated, SDU received before the timer expired, concatenating SDUs to form a PDU, also see 0036, PDU has multiple concatenated SDU); applying ciphering to the PDCP PDU (see Rossbach 0084, perform ciphering after concatenation); and submitting the PDCP PDU to a lower layer (see Rossbach 0087, providing PDU to the lower layer). Rossbach is silent in regard to the concept of the concatenation timer is stopped upon the PDCP PDU is submitted. Sagfors teaches the concept of the concatenation timer is stopped upon the PDCP PDU is submitted (see Sagfors 0026,0028, stop the timer, PDU is readout, which include moving PDU to transmission unit for convey PDU out of the node/device). It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Sagfors to Rossbach because they're analogous art. A person would have been motivated to modify Rossbach with Sagfors’ teaching for the purpose of efficiently processing concatenation of SDUs. As regarding claim 2, Rossbach-Sagfors discloses based on the concatenation timer being expired, generating the PDCP PDU including the first PDCP SDU (see Rossbach 0107-0108, 0110 concatenate SDUs into PDU, received SDUs are continued to concatenate if timer is not expire, this implies that the PDU is generated or created when the timer expired), wherein the concatenation timer is restarted upon the concatenation timer is stopped (see Rossbach 0107, activate and deactivate concatenation, and concatenation is based on a timer (Rossbach 0108), it is obvious that the timer is restart if the concatenation is activate again). As regarding claim 3, Rossbach-Sagfors discloses configuring a maximum size of PDCP SDUs included in the PDCP PDU, wherein, based on a total size of the first PDCP SDU and the second PDCP SDU being equal to or less than the maximum size, the PDCP PDU including the first PDCP SDU and the second PDCP SDU is generated (see Rossbach 0060-0063, maximum size of PDU which includes multiple SDUs). As regarding claim 4, Rossbach-Sagfors discloses a first discard timer for the first PDCP SDU is started upon receiving the first PDCP SDU, a second discard timer for the second PDCP SDU is started upon receiving the second PDCP SDU, based on all of the first discard timer and the second discard timer being expired, a discard of the PDCP PDU is indicated to the lower layer (see Rossbach 0107, activate and deactivate concatenation, and concatenation is based on a timer (Rossbach 0108), it is obvious that the multiple timers can be started for multiple received SDUs and also expire of multiple timers, also see Sagfors 0028, the timer/s are expired PDU is readout, which include moving PDU to transmission unit for convey PDU out of the node/device). The same motivation was utilized in claim 1 applied equally well to claim 4. As regarding claims 5-10, limitations of claims 5-10 are similar to limitations of rejected claims 1-4 above, therefore rejected for the same rationale. Rossbach-Sagfors further discloses a transceiver, a processor and a memory (see Rossbach 0152). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUYEN MY DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4226. The examiner can normally be reached (571)272-4226. 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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached at (571)272-4170. 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. /DUYEN M DOAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603860
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MANAGING SYNCHRONIZATION SOURCE COLLISIONS IN MISSION CRITICAL SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12581282
VIRTUAL NETWORK (VN) GROUP AUTOMATION FOR DYNAMIC SHARED DATA IN 5G CORE NETWORK (5GC)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561717
Monitoring and Using Telemetry Data
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556485
FINE-GRAINED AND COARSE-GRAINED CONGESTION WINDOW SYNCHRONIZATION FOR TCP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12537707
SORTING METHOD FOR SORTING A PARTICIPANT LIST COMPRISING PARTICIPANTS OF A VIDEO CONFERENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+12.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 670 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