Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/751,663

HANDOVER OF USER EQUIPMENT WITH MULTIMEDIA BROADCAST MULTICAST SERVICES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jun 24, 2024
Priority
Nov 17, 2016 — provisional 62/423,644 +1 more
Examiner
AHMED, NIZAM U
Art Unit
2461
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Comcast Cable Communications LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
267 granted / 353 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
374
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
65.2%
+25.2% vs TC avg
§102
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 353 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on 07/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below: Applicant’s arguments and the examiner’s response: Applicant’s argument page 11-12, recites “Applicant traverses this rejection because Fujishiro does not disclose a handover request message that comprises "a group-radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) associated with the one or more multimedia services indicated by the wireless device" as presently required by the claims..” Examiner’s Response: The examiner respectively disagrees. The examiner’s rejection is based on the recited claim limitations. And the examiner must interpret the claims under the BRI (broadest reasonable interpretation). Fujishiro teaches, in para [0123], where, “The SC-PTM setting information includes information indicating a correspondence (mapping) between the TMGI indicating the MBMS service (group communication service) and the Group-Radio Network Temporary Identifier (G-RNTI) used for providing the MBMS service. Thus, the UE 100 receiving the SC-PTM setting information can grasp the G-RNTI allocated to the TMGI in which the UE 100 has an interest”. Which was exactly interpreted the mapping of the rejected limitation. Therefore, Fujishiro teaches said limitation. Hence the arguments are traversed and maintained the rejection. All the remaining arguments are based on the arguments above and are responded to in full. 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 1-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fujishiro et al (US 2018/0035340 A1), hereinafter, “Fujishiro”. Regarding claim 1, Fujishiro discloses: A method comprising: receiving, by a first base station from a second base station, a handover request message for a wireless device (fig 13, step S403, para [0182], where, “Target Cell eNB200-2” equivalent to “first base station” receive handover request with GC Indication from the “Source Cell eNB200-1” equivalent to “second base station”), wherein the handover request message (fig 13, step S403, para [0182]-[0184]) comprises: one or more temporary identities (fig 13, para [0182]-[0184], where, in step S401 and S403, where the handover request message include GC (group communication) indication including TMGI (temporary mobile group identifier)) of one or more multimedia services indicated by the wireless device (fig 13, para [0177]-[0178] and para [0182], where, handover message include the TMGI indicating the MBMS service, step S401 and S403); and a group identifier associated with the one or more multimedia services indicated by the wireless device (fig 9, 13, para [0123]-[0124], where, “The SC-PTM setting information includes information indicating a correspondence (mapping) between the TMGI indicating the MBMS service (group communication service) and the Group-Radio Network Temporary Identifier (G-RNTI) used for providing the MBMS service); and transmitting, by the first base station to the wireless device and using the G-RNTI (fig 13, para [0180], where, The eNB 200-1 the Source Cell transmit the RRC connection reconfiguration with GC related control information in step S405 to the UE 100), transport blocks (fig 3, para [0064], where, “The MAC layer of the eNB 200 includes a scheduler that determines a transport format of an uplink and a downlink (a transport block size and a modulation and coding scheme (MCS)) and a resource block to be assigned to the UE 100”) associated with at least one of the one or more multimedia services (fig 4A, para [0077], where, “A Multicast Control Channel (MCCH) is a logical channel for one-to-many (broadcast/multicast) transmission. The MCCH is used for transmitting MBMS control information for a Multicast Traffic Channel (MTCH) from the network to the UE 100 . The MCCH is mapped to a Multicast Channel (MCH) that is a transport channel”). Regarding claim 8, the claim of a first base station includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the handover process for the base station, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto. Regarding claims 14 and 20, the claim related to a method and a second base station includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding information processing method of the second base station, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto. Additionally, the claims require RRC messaging and MBMS services, where, Fujishiro teaches RRC messaging (para [0067] and MBMS services [0050]). Regarding claim 25, the claim related to a system includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding information processing method of the system, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto. Regarding claim 2 and 26, Fujishiro discloses: receiving, by the second base station from the wireless device , at least one radio resource control (RRC) message comprising the one or more temporary identities of the one or more multimedia services (fig 12, para [0170] and [0175], where, the UE 100 transmit the GC Indication with TMGI in step S301 using RRC messaging to the “Serving Cell eNB200” equivalent to “second base station”). Regarding claims 3, 16, 22 and 28, Fujishiro discloses: transmitting, by the second base station to the wireless device and via a handover request acknowledge message, one or more configuration parameters for the at least one of the one or more multimedia services (fig 13 steps S404, where, the second base station, eNB200-1 para [0182], receive the Handover Request Acknowledgement message and transmitting RRC connection reconfiguration w/GC related control information by the second base station). Regarding claims 4, 9, 10, 15, 17, 21 and 27, Fujishiro discloses: further comprising: transmitting, by the first base station, one or more parameters for at least one of the one or more multimedia services (fig 13, para [0184], “transmits a handover request “acceptance message” (equivalent to “acknowledge message”) to the source BS (S915)”). Regarding claims 5, 11 and 30, Fujishiro discloses: The method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, by the first base station to the second base station, a handover request acknowledge message in response to the handover request message (fig 13 steps S404, where, the second base station, eNB200-1 para [0182], receive the Handover Request Acknowledgement message and transmitting RRC connection reconfiguration w/GC related control information by the second base station), wherein the handover request acknowledge message indicates accepting one or more bearers (fig 13, para [0193], where, “the UE 100 determines to switch to the unicast transmission to receive data belonging to the group communication service, and may request a GGS AS 31 to establish a unicast bearer (EPS bearer). Thus, the UE 100 can continue reception of the group communication service”). Regarding claims 6, 12, 31 and 32, Fujishiro discloses: further comprising: transmitting, by the first base station to the wireless device (fig 14, para [0199]-[0201], where, the first base station eNB200-2 sends SIB with GC related control information to the UE 100) and based on a handover of the wireless device from the second base station to the first base station, one or more messages indicating a release of resources associated with the second base station (fig 13 steps S404, where, the second base station, eNB200-1 para [0182], receive the Handover Request Acknowledgement message and transmitting RRC connection reconfiguration w/GC related control information by the second base station). Regarding claims 7, 13, 19, 24, 29 and 38-42, Fujishiro discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more multimedia services indicated by the wireless device comprise: one or more multimedia broadcast multicast service (MBMS) services the wireless device is receiving; or one or more MBMS services the wireless device is interested in receiving (fig 8, para [0110], where, “performs MBMS scheduling with reference to “MBMS scheduling information” equivalent to “MBMS parameter” received from the MCE 11, and then performs multiplexing (Multiplexing), and mapping to the MCH”). Regarding claims 18 and 23, Fujishiro discloses: further comprising: releasing, by the second base station and based on the receiving the one or more messages indicating successful handover of the wireless device, one or more resources associated with the one or more multimedia services (para [0250], where, “Proposal 5: For service continuity, it is up to NW implementation, whether the UE should begin to receive the service of interest via Unicast before or after “handover completion” (equivalent to “handover successful”), in case the target cell doesn't provide the service of interest via either SC-PTM or MBSFN”). Regarding claims 33-37, Fujishiro discloses: wherein: the one or more temporary identities comprise one or more temporary mobile group identities (TMGIs) (fig 8, para [0043], where, a “particular group communication service is represented by a temporary mobile group identity (TMGI)”, see further para [0058], [0106]); and the group identifier comprises a group-radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) (para [0123], where, “particular group communication service is represented by a temporary mobile group identity (TMGI)”). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIZAM U AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-9561. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fry, 7:00 AM-6:00 PM PST. 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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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. /NIZAM U AHMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Jun 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Sep 26, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 13, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102
Feb 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Jul 16, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 17, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12750759
DETERMING TIME OF ARRIVAL BASED ON PHASE MEASUREMENT
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12750685
SIDELINK TRANSMISSION ENHANCEMENT
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12732254
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND NON-TRANSITORY PROCESSOR-READABLE MEDIA FOR DETERMINING PRECODING INFORMATION FOR UPLINK TRANSMISSIONS
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12720426
CARRIER AGGREGATION CONFIGURATION BASED ON POWER HEADROOM REPORT
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12719649
FREQUENCY HOPPING AND COLLISION HANDLING FOR UPLINK TRANSMISSION IN ADVANCED DUPLEX SYSTEMS
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+22.5%)
3y 2m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 353 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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