Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/691,591

TRIGGERING USER EQUIPMENT-SIDE MACHINE LEARNING MODEL UPDATE FOR MACHINE LEARNING-BASED POSITIONING

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Mar 13, 2024
Examiner
GHULAMALI, QUTBUDDIN
Art Unit
2632
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Nokia Technologies Oy
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
911 granted / 1071 resolved
+23.1% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1092
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.5%
+0.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1071 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
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 . Status of Claims The following action is in response to application filed March 13, 2024. The preliminary amended claims 1-14, 16-17, 19-20, 22 and 27, are currently pending. Claims 15, 18, 21 and 23-26, have been canceled. 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. Claims 1-13, 14, 16-17, 19-20, 22, 27, 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. The term “more accurate” in claim 1, 14 and 27, is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “more accurate” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As based understood the term accurate coupled with more, does not in itself define the scope of “accurate” in the prediction of the second value making the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. Claims 2-13, 16-17, 19-20 and 23, claims dependency from claims 1 and 14, they are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 14, treated above. 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. Claim 27, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed a non-statutory subject matter. Claim 27, recites "A computer readable medium....". Machine readable medium, Computer readable medium and computer program per se are not directed to statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is obliged to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F. 2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, (Machine readable medium also called Computer readable medium and other such variations typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of machine readable media. See MPEP 2111.01. Because the broadest reasonable interpretation covers a signal per se, a rejection under 35 USC 101 is appropriate as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nutjen, 500 F. 3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and 351 OG 212, Feb 23 2010. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI whose telephone number is (571) 272-3014. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am to 4:00pm. 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, Chieh Fan can be reached on 571 272 3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598538
UNIFIED ACCESS CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596168
INDOOR-OUTDOOR DETECTION BY SMARTPHONE WITHOUT USING GPS INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598445
APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING MEDIA SERVER USING MOBILE APPLICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593305
METHODS, APPARATUSES, SYSTEM AND PRODUCT FOR POSITIONING DETERMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593262
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TERMINAL TO ACCESS NETWORK, DEVICE, AND READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1071 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