Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/696,295

METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CONDITIONAL PSCELL ADDITION/CHANGE AND CONDITIONAL HANDOVER INTERWORKING AND RLF HANDLING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 27, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, THAI
Art Unit
2469
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
659 granted / 776 resolved
+26.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
798
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
10.8%
-29.2% vs TC avg
§112
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 776 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 . Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter recited in claims 1, 11 lines 6-11, 17-19 in both claims. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Applicant’s specification dated 7/13/2017 fails to provide any description related to “a first signal quality threshold associated with the primary cell of the first base station; a second signal quality threshold associated with the one or more candidate primary secondary cells; responsive to the detection information and based on a first signal quality of the primary cell of the first base station and the first signal quality threshold; send, to the first base station using resources of the second base station, second information comprising an indication of the radio link failure on the primary cell of the first base station” Claim Objections Claims 2, 3, 11, 12, 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein the second information further comprises any of:”. For clarity it’s suggested to amend this limitation to recite “wherein the second information further comprises one of:” Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein any of the first signal quality threshold and the second signal quality threshold comprise any of...”. For clarity it’s suggested to amend this limitation to recite “wherein one of the first signal quality threshold and the second signal quality threshold comprise one of...” Claim 11 recites the limitation “A wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising a processor and a transmitter/receiver unit configured to:”. For clarity it’s suggested to add “:” after comprising. Claim 12 recites the limitation “wherein the second information further comprises any of:”. For clarity it’s suggested to amend this limitation to recite “wherein the second information further comprises one of:” Claim 13 recites the limitation “wherein any of the first signal quality threshold and the second signal quality threshold comprise any of...”. For clarity it’s suggested to amend this limitation to recite “wherein one of the first signal quality threshold and the second signal quality threshold comprise one of...” 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deenoo et al (WO2021067236A1), provided by Applicant’s IDS, in view of Hu et al (USPN 20220394620) and Rugeland et al (USPN 20190289510). Regarding claim 11, Deenoo discloses a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising a processor and a transmitter/receiver unit configured to: (WTRU, FIG. 1B #102, comprising processor, FIG. 1B #118, and transceiver, FIG. 1B #120, operable to [0028-0029], FIGs. 2-6 receive, from a first base station, configuration information indicating one or more candidate primary secondary cells of a second base station (receive from base station/MN associated with MCG information including candidate PScells/SN [0188, 0003, 0069, 0087], FIGs. 2-6 detection information indicating a detection of a radio link failure (configured with conditions/triggers for measuring RSRP, RSRQ, SINR and timer expiration information for MCG [0087, 0115, 0117] a second signal quality threshold associated with the one or more candidate primary secondary cells (receive configuration information including RSRP, RSRQ, SINR thresholds [0094, 0107, 0115, 0137] responsive to the detection information and based on a first signal quality of the primary cell of the first base station and the first signal quality threshold (measurement event related to signal quality of MCG/MN indicating beam failure [0117, 0115] perform a primary secondary cell addition of a primary secondary cell of the one or more candidate primary secondary cells based on a second signal quality of the primary secondary cell and the second signal quality threshold (perform PScell addition when measured when RSRP, RSRQ, SINR meet thresholds [0107, 0115, 0003, 0094, 0135, 0084, 0137] send, to the second base station, first information comprising an indication of a completion of the primary secondary cell addition of the primary secondary cell of the one or more candidate primary cells (transmits to SCG/SN indication of conditional PSCell addition and/or change (CPAC) when the WTRU completes CPAC [0173, 0073]. Deenoo discloses detecting RLF in MCG/MN [0100, 0102]. However Deenoo does not expressly disclose radio link failure on a primary cell of a primary cell; a first signal quality threshold associated with the primary cell of the first base station. Hu discloses radio link failure on a primary cell of a primary cell (radio link failure on Pcell [0145] a first signal quality threshold associated with the primary cell of the first base station (signal quality, RSRP/SINR, of Pcell in MCG below threshold [0144, 0146] Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “radio link failure on a primary cell of a primary cell; a first signal quality threshold associated with the primary cell of the first base station” as taught by Hu into Deenoo’s system with the motivation to detection RLF on Pcell using signal threshold (Hu, paragraph [0144, 0146]). Combined system of Deenoo and Hu does not expressly disclose send, to the first base station using resources of the second base station, second information comprising an indication of the radio link failure on the primary cell of the first base station. Rugeland discloses send, to the first base station using resources of the second base station, second information comprising an indication of the radio link failure on the primary cell of the first base station (wireless device, e.g. FIG. 3 #10, transmits MCG failure information message regarding MeNB to the MeNB through second node/SeNB, FIG. 3 #13 [0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3, 5. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “send, to the first base station using resources of the second base station, second information comprising an indication of the radio link failure on the primary cell of the first base station” as taught by Rugeland into combined system of Deenoo and Hu with the motivation to enable a quick response to RLF with reduced service interruption (Rugeland, paragraph [0021, 0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3). Claim 1 is rejected based on similar ground(s) based on rejection of claim 11. Regarding claims 2, 12, combined system of Deenoo and Hu does not expressly disclose “wherein the second information further comprises any of (2) the second signal quality of the primary secondary cell” failure report contains signal strength/signal quality of SeNB [0050, 0051] Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “wherein the second information further comprises any of (2) the second signal quality of the primary secondary cell” as taught by Rugeland into combined system of Deenoo and Hu with the motivation to enable a quick response to RLF with reduced service interruption (Rugeland, paragraph [0021, 0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3). Regarding claims 3, 13, Deenoo discloses “wherein any of the first signal quality threshold and the second signal quality threshold comprises any of: a reference signal received power threshold, a reference signal received quality threshold, and signal to interference and noise threshold” RSRP, RSRQ, SINR meet thresholds [0107, 0115, 0003, 0094, 0135]. Regarding claims 4, 14, Deenoo discloses “performing bearer type change” WTRU changes bearer type from MCG and SCG [0189], FIGs. 4-5. Regarding claims 5, 15, Hu discloses “wherein the WTRU is initially operating in a connected mode in single connectivity” Deenoo discloses WTRU only connected to MCG [0189], FIG. 4. Regarding claims 6, 16, Deenoo discloses “selecting the primary secondary cell from among a subset of the one or more candidate primary secondary cells, wherein each candidate primary secondary cell of the subset of the one or more candidate primary secondary cells has a signal quality above the second signal quality threshold” WTRU considers from a set of PSCell candidates for selection if the candidates signal quality is above threshold and select a PSCell with the best measurement [0107, 0115, 0003, 0094, 0135, 0084, 0137]. Regarding claims 7, 17, Deenoo discloses “wherein selecting the primary secondary cell is based on the signal quality of each primary secondary cell of the subset of the one or more candidate primary secondary cells” select a PSCell with the best measurement [0107, 0115, 0003, 0094, 0135, 0084, 0137]. Regarding claims 8, 18, Deenoo discloses “wherein the first base station is associated with a master cell group” base station/MN associated with MCG [0188, 0003, 0069, 0087], FIGs. 2-6 Combined system of Deenoo and Hu does not expressly disclose “receiving, from the second base station, third information indicating a master cell group reconfiguration” Rugeland discloses “and the method further comprising: receiving, from the second base station, third information indicating a master cell group reconfiguration” wireless device receives RRC connection reconfiguration message from second network node indicating reconfiguration of MCG [0075, 0008], FIG. 5. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “receiving, from the second base station, third information indicating a master cell group reconfiguration” as taught by Rugeland into combined system of Deenoo and Hu with the motivation to enable a quick response to RLF with reduced service interruption (Rugeland, paragraph [0021, 0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3). Regarding claims 9, 19, combined system of Deenoo and Hu does not expressly disclose “applying the a master cell group reconfiguration”. Rugeland discloses “applying the a master cell group reconfiguration” wireless device receives RRC connection reconfiguration message from second network node indicating reconfiguration of MCG and apply the change by performing random access to new MeNB, FIG. 5 #14, [0075-0078, 0008], FIG. 5 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “applying the a master cell group reconfiguration” as taught by Rugeland into combined system of Deenoo and Hu with the motivation to enable a quick response to RLF with reduced service interruption (Rugeland, paragraph [0021, 0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3). Regarding claims 10, 20, combined system of Deenoo and Hu does not expressly disclose “wherein the second information is included in a master cell group failure information report” Rugeland discloses wireless device transmits failure report comprising MCG failure information [0049, 0050, 0068-0070], FIGs. 3, 5 Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “wherein the second information is included in a master cell group failure information report” as taught by Rugeland into combined system of Deenoo and Hu with the motivation to enable a quick response to RLF with reduced service interruption (Rugeland, paragraph [0021, 0047-0049, 0190], FIGs. 2, 3). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Eklof et al (USPN 20240381216) FIG. 7 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days. 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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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. /THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 27, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603744
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR 2-STEP RANDOM ACCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604258
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFYING WI-FI DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598588
MULTIPLE SUPPLEMENTAL UPLINK (SUL) CARRIERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592760
BEAM SELECTION FOR RANDOM ACCESS IN A HIERARCHICAL BEAM ARCHITECTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587998
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PATTERN DESIGN FOR SIDELINK POSITIONING REFERENCE SIGNALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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 (+14.7%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 776 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