Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/695,373

TERMINAL APPARATUS, BASE STATION APPARATUS, AND COMMUNICATION METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
ROBERTS, BRIAN S
Art Unit
2466
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
620 granted / 730 resolved
+26.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
751
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
§103
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 730 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claims 1-3 have been examined. Claim Objections Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 line 2 “PDCCH” should read –Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)-- Claim 1 line 2 “DCI” should read –Downlink Control Information (DCI)-- Claim 1 line 3 “PDSCH” should read --Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH)-- Claim 1 line 4 “PUSCH” should read –Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)— Claim 1 line 7 “CRC” should read –Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)— Claim 1 line 7 “TC-RNTI” should read --Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (TC-RNTI)— Claim 1 line 12 “C-RNTI” should read --Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 1 line 12 “CS-RNTI” should read --Configured Scheduling Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 1 line 12 “MCS-C-RNTI” should --Modulation Coding Scheme Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (MCS-C-RNTI)-- Claim 2 line 2 “PDCCH” should read –Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)-- Claim 2 line 2 “DCI” should read –Downlink Control Information (DCI)-- Claim 2 line 3 “PDSCH” should read --Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH)-- Claim 2 line 4 “PUSCH” should read –Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)— Claim 2 line 7 “CRC” should read –Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)— Claim 2 line 7 “TC-RNTI” should read --Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (TC-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 12 “C-RNTI” should read --Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 12 “CS-RNTI” should read --Configured Scheduling Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 12 “MCS-C-RNTI” should --Modulation Coding Scheme Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (MCS-C-RNTI)-- Claim 3 line 3 “PDCCH” should read –Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)-- Claim 3 line 3 “DCI” should read –Downlink Control Information (DCI)-- Claim 3 line 3 “PDSCH” should read --Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH)-- Claim 3 line 4 “PUSCH” should read –Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)— Claim 3 line 8 “CRC” should read –Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)— Claim 2 line 8 “TC-RNTI” should read --Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (TC-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 13 “C-RNTI” should read --Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 13 “CS-RNTI” should read --Configured Scheduling Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI)— Claim 2 line 13 “MCS-C-RNTI” should --Modulation Coding Scheme Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (MCS-C-RNTI)-- Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEI et al. (US 2021/0195653) in view of Xiong et al. (US 2021/0251016). - In reference to claim 1 LEI et al. teaches a terminal apparatus (e.g. UE 106; par. 0064) comprising: a receiver (e.g. receiver; par. 0064) configured to receive a PDCCH to which DCI is mapped or to receive a PDSCH including a random access response grant (e.g. receive random access response i.e. message 2 on PDSCH; par. 0107); and a transmitter (e.g. transmitter; par. 0064) configured to transmit a PUSCH (e.g. message 3 transmitted using PUSCH; par. 0107), in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by a TC-RNTI, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot, (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 2) in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by at least one of a C-RNTI, a CS-RNTI, or an MCS-C-RNTI, the number of slots for the frequency hopping interval is determined by a certain higher layer parameter (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 2). LEI et al. does not teach wherein frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot. Xiong et al. teaches wherein frequency hopping for a PUSCH is performed based on the random access response grant and in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot (e.g. frequency hopping for PUSCH is performed based on random access response wherein frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is N slots wherein N maybe the integer 1; par. 0072-0076). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of LEI et al. to include frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot as suggested by Xiong et al. because it would allow a base station to schedule a frequency hopping interval for the PUSCH in each time slot via the random access response and the UE/terminal apparatus to transmit based upon scheduled frequency hopping in each time slot in order to facilitate communications between the base station and the UE/terminal apparatus. - In reference to claim 2 LEI et al. teaches a base station apparatus (e.g. base station 106; par. 0064) comprising: a transmitter (e.g. transmitter; par. 0064) configured to transmit a PDCCH to which DCI is mapped or to transmit a PDSCH including a random access response grant (e.g. transmit random access response i.e. message 2 on PDSCH; par. 0107); and a receiver (e.g. receiver; par. 0064) configured to receive a PUSCH (e.g. message 3 received using PUSCH; par. 0107), in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by a TC-RNTI, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 2) in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by at least one of a C-RNTI, a CS-RNTI, or an MCS-C-RNTI, the number of slots for the frequency hopping interval is determined by a certain higher layer parameter (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 2). LEI et al. does not teach wherein frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot. Xiong et al. teaches frequency hopping for a PUSCH is performed based on the random access response grant and in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot (e.g. frequency hopping for PUSCH is performed based on random access response wherein frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is N slots wherein N maybe the integer 1; par. 0072-0076). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of LEI et al. to include frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot as suggested by Xiong et al. because it would allow a base station to schedule frequency hopping for the PUSCH in each time slot via the random access response and to receive from a UE transmissions based upon scheduled frequency hopping in each time slot in order to facilitate communications between the base station and the UE. - In reference to claim 3 LEI et al. teaches communication method used in a terminal apparatus (e.g. UE 106; par. 0064), the communication method comprising the steps of: receiving a PDCCH to which DCI is mapped or receiving a PDSCH including a random access response grant (e.g. receive random access response i.e. message 2 on PDSCH; par. 0107); and transmitting a PUSCH (e.g. message 3 transmitted using PUSCH; par. 0107), in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by a TC-RNTI, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot, (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 3) and in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the DCI with a CRC scrambled by at least one of a C-RNTI, a CS-RNTI, or an MCS-C-RNTI, the number of slots for the frequency hopping interval is determined by a certain higher layer parameter (language not required by claim because of “or” in line 3). LEI et al. does not teach wherein frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot. Xiong et al. teaches wherein frequency hopping for a PUSCH is performed based on the random access response grant and in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, a frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is one slot (e.g. frequency hopping for PUSCH is performed based on random access response wherein frequency hopping interval corresponding to the frequency hopping is N slots; par. 0072-0076). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of LEI et al. to include frequency hopping for the PUSCH is performed based at least on the DCI or the random access response grant, in a case that the PUSCH is scheduled by the random access response grant, the frequency hopping interval is one slot as suggested by Xiong et al. because it would allow a base station to schedule a frequency hopping interval for the PUSCH in each time slot via the random access response and the UE/terminal apparatus to transmit based upon scheduled frequency hopping in each time slot in order to facilitate communications between the base station and the UE/terminal apparatus. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are: US 10091631 pertains to receiving a downlink signal by a machine type communication user equipment (MTC UE) in a wireless communication system can comprise obtaining frequency hopping information on a plurality of subbands included in a downlink band and repeatedly receiving the downlink signal via different subbands based on the frequency hopping information. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN S ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-3095. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 5pm. 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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. BRIAN S. ROBERTS Primary Examiner Art Unit 2466 /BRIAN S ROBERTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604254
FORWARDING-CAPABLE NETWORK ENTITY RECONFIGURATION RATE CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598536
MONITORING PROCEDURE FOR RELAY PATH SCENARIOS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598533
WLAN CELLULAR AGGREGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593255
TAG MAINTENANCE, UPDATE, AND SIGNALING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593261
METHODS FOR INTER IAB-DONOR-DU BAP TUNNELING
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
90%
With Interview (+4.9%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 730 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